BLM LIBRARY
88000447
NEVADA
VND MANAGEMENT
AUG 4 mz
History of Ceptral Nevada:
AN OVERVIEW OF THE
BATTLE MOUNTAIN DISTRICT
Martha H. Bowers
Hans Muessig
CULTURAL RESOURCE SERIES No. 4
1982
Bureau of agement
al Center
No.
3
No.
4
No.
5
No.
6
No.
7
NEVADA BLM CULTURAL RESOURCES PUBLICATIONS
Technical Reports
No. 1 Studies at Adams-UcGill Reservoir: Exercises in Applying Small
Project Data to Archaeological Research . Robert York (Nov. 1977) .
ca. 18 pp. OOP
No. 2 Archaeological Survey of Springs, Tonopah Resource Area . Roberta
L. McGonagle and Lynda L. Waski (Feb. 1978). 60 pp. OOP
Oil and Gas /Geo thermal Program Inventories . Nancy Botti , Peggy
McGuckian, Robert York and Mark Henderson (June 1979). ca . Ill pp. OOP
Artifact Assemblages from the Pahranagat, Lincoln County, Nevada .
Robert H. Crabtree and David D. Ferraro (Jan. 1980). 74 pp. OOP
Test Excavations at Painted Cave, Pershing County, Nevada . James C.
Bard, Colin I. Busby and Larry S. Kobori (Feb. 1980). 153 pp. OOP
Emigrant Trails in the Black Rock Desert . Peggy McGuckian Jones
(Apr. 1980). 110 pp.
An Historic Overview of the BLM Shoshone-Eureka Resource Area, Nevada .
Patrick H. Welch (1981). 47 pp.
Cultural Resources Series
No. 1 The Pony Express in Central Nevada: Archaeological and Documentary
Perspectives . Donald L. Hardesty (1979). 175 pp.
No. 2 A Cultural Resources Overview of the Carson & Humboldt Sinks, Nevada .
James C. Bard, Colin I. Busby and John M. Findlay (1981). 214 pp.
No . 3 Prehistory, Ethnohistory, and History of Eastern Nevada: A Cultural
Resources Summary of the Elko and Ely Districts . Steven R. James
(1981). 387 pp.
No. 4 History of Central Nevada: An Overview of the Battle Mountain District .
Martha H. Bowers and Hans Muessig (1982). 209 pp.
Copies of all volumes still in print may be obtained from:
Bureau of Land Management
P.O. Box 12000
300 Booth Street
Reno, Nevada 89520
History of Central Nevada
AN OVERVIEW OF THE
BATTLE MOUNTAIN DISTRICT
Cultural Resource Series
Monograph Mo. 4
Published by the Nevada State Office of the
Bureau of Land Management,
300 Booth Street, P.O. Box 12000
Reno, Nevada 89520
May, 1982
Bureau of Land Management
Library
Bicig. 50, Den al Center
Denver {
BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT LIBRARY
Denver, Colorado
88666447
FORWARD
The History of Central Nevada by Martha Bowers and Hans Muessig is the
fourth in the series of "Cultural Resources Monographs" published by the
Nevada State Office of the Bureau of Land Management and is the result of a
contract awarded to Dennett, Muessig and Associates of Iowa City, Iowa, in
1980. The contract was administered by Roberta L. McGonagle, BLM Battle
Mountain District archeologist; editing for publication of this, and the
previous volumes in the series, was by the undersigned.
Like that of the previous monograph in the series (No. 3: Prehistory,
Ethnohi story and History of Eastern Nevada ), the geographical scope of the
present work is confined to a particular BLM administrative unit, in this
case, the Battle Mountain District of the central part of the state. Unlike
that study, however, chronological coverage is limited to historic times,
the handful of generations between the entry of the first white trappers,
explorers and settlers into the study area and the historic present. In
keeping with this limitation the authors of this volume are historians rather
than archeologists. History has traditionally received less attention than
prehistory in Government sponsored "cultural resources" work in the Great
Basin and it was thought that an historical emphasis would not only partially
redress the balance but was also likely to lead to the development of a
framework applicable to future studies beyond the boundaries of Battle Mountain
District. The results appear to us to have fulfilled both these expectations.
The main emphasis, of course, is on the major themes which inevitably
dominate any serious history of the state: mining, ranching, agriculture and
transportation. The authors' treatment of these themes is admirably succinct
and well-organized and makes a worthy contribution to the literature of the
subject. The History of Central Nevada , however, also has many other virtues.
Particularly useful, filling a long-standing need, are the descriptions and
discussion of historical archeological remains—houses, ranch, farm and com-
mercial buildings, and mining and other industrial structures. Another, is
the attention paid to such neglected topics (neglected, at least, in Nevada
and in works of this kind) as rural educational arrangements in the early
days and vernacular architecture. The treatment of the latter topic includes
a discussion of local building techniques and is especially interesting and
rewarding.
A major goal of the monograph series of which this study is a part is to
bring together key information on Nevada history and prehistory on a regional
basis with a view both to providing a context for the results of future research
and to identifying gaps in the local archeological and historical records. It
is felt that the authors of the present volume have succeeded admirably on both
counts. They have also succeeded in writing an interesting and highly readable
work and it is hoped that its readership will be drawn not only from the pro-
fessional community (government "cultural resources" managers, and professional
historians and archeologists) but also from the general public, particularly
present-day residents of the study area with an interest in the way of life
and considerable achievements of their predecessors and, in many cases, ancestors
It wasn't, after all, that long ago.
Richard C. Hanes, State Archeologist
Fredric F. Petersen, Archeologist
BLM Nevada State Office
Reno
May, 1982
HISTORY OF CENTRAL NEVADA:
AN OVERVIEW OF THE BATTLE MOUNTAIN DISTRICT
By
Martha H. Bowers
and
Hans Muessig
Dennett, Muessig & Associates, Ltd.
Contract No. YA-553-CTO-102^
Between the
Bureau of Land Management
and
Dennett, Muessig & Associates, Ltd.
Iowa City, Iowa
1982
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
TABLE OF ILLUSTRATIONS iii
ABSTRACT iv
ORIENTATION 1
COLLECTIONS k
PAST AND CURRENT INVESTIGATIONS 7
CENTRAL NEVADA: A THEMATIC INTERPRETATION 16
The Setting 16
Exploration 18
The Native American Experience 21
Mining: The Context 23
Mining: The Central Nevada Experience 30
Mining: The Pattern of Development 39
Mining: The Technology kk
Landscape and Arrangement of Mining Towns .... 57
Industry: Non-Mining 5$
Immigrants 63
Commerce 67
Transportation 71
Agriculture 77
Ranchers and Ranches 86
Town and Valley: Expressions of Community ... 97
OCCUPATION AND LAND USE: A SYNTHESIS 107
CULTURAL RESOURCES SURVEY AND MANAGEMENT: OBSERVATIONS
AND RECOMMENDATIONS Ill
APPENDIX
A: CAPSULE HISTORIES OF MINING DISTRICTS AND
MINERAL OCCURRENCES WITHIN THE BLM-BATTLE
MOUNTAIN DISTRICT 121
B: HISTORIC SITE INVENTORY FORMS FROM SELECTED
STATES 1^3
C: PROPOSAL FOR REVISION OF BLM HISTORIC SITE
RECORD FORM N6-8111-2 150
D: THEMATIC APPROACHES TO HISTORICAL/
ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES 154
A NOTE ON HISTORICAL SOURCES 17^
BIBLIOGRAPHY 179
11
TABLE OF ILLUSTRATIONS
Map 1
Map 2
Map 3
Map 4
Map 5
Map 6
Map 7
Map 8:
Map 9:
Graph 1
The BLM-Battle Mountain Dis
Central Nevada Mining Camps
Central Nevada Mining Camps
Central Nevada Mining Camps
Central Nevada Mining Camps
Central Nevada Mining Camps
Central Nevada Mining Distr
Towns, 1862-1920
Pony Express and Stage/Frei
Proximity to Present Roads
Mining Districts and Minera
BLM-Battle Mountain Distric
trict, Nevada
, 1862-1869
, 1870-1879
, 1880-1899
, 1900-1909
, 1910-1920
icts, Camps a
nd
ght Stations ,
and Highways
1 Occurrences
t, 1862-19^0
and
Aggregate Annual Mining Production, 1865-
19^0 : Eureka, Lander and Nye Counties .
Figure 1: The Geography of Major Activities in Mining
Camps
Figure 2: The Valley Settlement Pattern
Figure 3: Main Transportation Routes: Location and
Relocation
Page
3
25
26
27
28
29
56
7^
122
3^
168
169
170
111
ABSTRACT
The Historic Cultural Resources Overview for the
BLM-Battle Mountain District has six major parts, plus four
appendices. "The Setting" briefly describes the physical
characteristics of the study area, and relates them to
aspects of the region's history since the mid-19th century.
Two following sections discuss past and current resource
investigations in the Battle Mountain District, and also
the nature and location of historic research materials. In
the fourth section, the historical development of the region
is presented, principal themes being industry (mining and
non-mining), transportation, architecture, agriculture and
settlement. The fifth section provides a synthesis of land
use patterns in central Nevada, from the mid-19th century to
the present day. The sixth section consists of general
recommendations for future historic/architectural resource
surveys and data management in the Battle Mountain District.
The appendices include a list of mining districts and mineral
occurrences, sample historic resource inventory forms from
other states, a proposed revision of BLM Historic Site Record
Form N6-8111-2, and, finally, an outline of possible research
designs and strategies for future study of historic and
architectural resources in the Battle Mountain District.
IV
ORIENTATION
The Bureau of Land Management's Battle Mountain District
encompasses major portions of Lander, Eureka and Nye counties
in the geographical heart of Nevada. The District extends
over 200 miles from Battle Mountain to Tonopah, and is nearly
125 miles across at its widest point in Nye county. Three
major highways cross the District from east to west:
Interstate 80 through Battle Mountain, U.S. 50 through
Eureka and Austin, and U.S. 6 through Tonopah. The principal
north-south highway is State 8A , from Battle Mountain through
Austin to Tonopah. Toiyabe National Forest is located in the
west-central part of the District, encompassing large por-
tions of the Shoshone, Toiyabe, Toquima and Monitor Ranges.
A segment of Humboldt National Forest is located on the
southeastern edge of the Battle Mountain District. The
District's southern edge is largely defined by the boundaries
of the Nuclear Test Site south of Tonopah.
The Battle Mountain District is a land of wide spaces,
its small population concentrated in the communities of
Battle Mountain, Tonopah, Eureka and Austin. Major economic
activities are mining and the range livestock industry;
tourism in the area is still limited, but growing. Most of
the land is under federal jurisdiction, principal exceptions
being mining patents and ranch holdings .
In April, I98O Dennett, Muessig & Associates, Ltd.
entered into a contract with the Bureau of Land Management
to prepare a Class I Cultural Resources Existing Data
Inventory. The report included a Known Cultural Resources
Site Data Compilation and a Cultural Resource Overview, the
archaeological components of which were developed by Science
Applications, Inc. of LaJolla. The present publication has
been adapted from that larger report, with the history and
architecture of the Battle Mountain District as the focus.
The original report was prepared under the general
supervision of Dr. Roberta L. McGonagle, BLM--Battle Mountain
District Archaeologist. The project historians were Martha H.
Bowers and Hans Muessig, of Dennett, Muessig & Associates.
Marie A. Neubauer and Angela Schiller, also of DMA, prepared
maps and grapnics.
The investigators owe thanks to many people for their
assistance in the course of this project, including Phillip
Earl and the staff of the Nevada Historical Society, Reno;
the staff of Special Collections at the University of Nevada,
Reno; and Charles Kensler, URS/john A . Blume, San Francisco.
Thanks are due also to Patrick Welch, formerly of the BLM-Battle
Mountain District archaeological staff for his comments on
portions of this report; to Lowell J. Soike, Chief of the
Historic Site Survey of the Iowa Division of Historic
Preservation for his advice and criticism; and to Roberta
McGonagle for her patience, responsiveness and guidance.
r
BATTLE MOUNTAIN
\
\
\
t ~J
Map h The BLM-Battle Mountain District, Nevada
COLLECTIONS
The principal repositories for Nevada primary source
materials (contemporary documents, manuscripts, maps,
photographs, and published works) are the Nevada Historical
Society (Reno), the Nevada State Library (Carson City), the
libraries of the University of Nevada (Reno) , and the
Bancroft Library (Berkeley) . Nevada materials are also
held by the Huntington Library (San Marino) , Yale University
(New Haven) , the Newberry Library (Chicago) , the California
State Library (Sacramento), and the Wells Fargo Bank (San
Francisco) . For the purpose of cultural resource investiga-
tion, however, the Nevada repositories contain the bulk of
the most useful material. Together, the Nevada institutions
hold a very large quantity of information, but it varies con-
siderably in depth. Mining is the most heavily covered
topic, while materials on other important subjects, such as
agriculture, transportation, social and cultural institutions,
and architecture, are either very limited or wholly lacking.
Most important of the Nevada repositories is the Nevada
Historical Society. Here may be found a good collection of
maps (including Sanborn Fire Insurance Company maps of major
towns, maps of mining districts, and railroad and government
surveys) and a very fine selection, on microfilm, of local
newspapers, ranging from Virginia City to Betty O'Neal and
Round Mountain. The Society's manuscript collection (for
which there is a published catalog) is large, and features
such items as business records, oral histories and remi-
niscences, contemporary documents such as tax receipts and
brand records, and the personal and business papers of
important Mevadans . In addition to a good selection of pub-
lished secondary works on Nevada history, the Society holds
an extensive photograph collection. The hundreds of images
(grouped roughly by subject, and as yet not thoroughly cata-
logued) include both historic and recent views. They consti-
tute an important visual record of the state's communities,
landscape, mining history and agricultural life.
The University of Nevada, Reno, libraries form another
valuable source of information. The large serials holdings
of the mining library include many articles (usually quite
technical) on Nevada mining; most useful of these are reports
and publications of the University's own School of Mines.
The Fleischmann library contains reports of the University's
Agricultural Extension Service, and also many federal publi-
cations on ranching and other agricultural activities. The
main library holds theses and dissertations on various
aspects of Nevada history, and a full range of published
works. Most valuable is the Special Collections Department.
The catalog here is very good, and includes maps, photo-
graphs, manuscripts, a special listing of Nevada materials
located throughout the University's library system, and also
a catalog of Nevada materials held at other institutions.
The range of materials, however, does not equal that of the
Historical Society. Maps generally cover wide areas of the
West, and thus do not contain the local information most
useful in cultural resources work. The photograph collection
is smaller than the Society's, and emphasises the Corns tocks
thus there are few images from the Battle Mountain District.
The Nevada State Library, Carson City, is the reposi-
tory for published state documents. Historically, Nevada
state government saw little need to publish extensive reports
on the activities of its officials, departments and agencies,
so the resulting coverage is somewhat uneven. Particularly
useful, however, are reports of state agencies appended to
the biennial reports of the state legislature. These agency
reports are also bound together by department or agency.
Of greatest potential use are reports from the Superintendent
of Public Instruction, Secretary of State, Labor Commissioner,
the State Engineer, Bank Examiner and Surveyor General. The
Library has an extremely limited map collection, and no
photograph collection. The Library's Nevada Room, however,
is worth noting. This room holds a broad collection of pub-
lished secondary works on state history, including city
directories, magazines, books and pamphlets. Much of this
material is available at other institutions, but in the
Nevada Room it is housed in open (rather than closed) stacks ,
which from the researcher's point of view are excellent for
browsing.
The Nevada State Archive (Carson City) also contains
state government publications. However, the Archive is not
really set up as a public research institution, being,
instead, a reference facility for the state legislature. At
the State Land Office (Carson City) are the original maps and
notes from the 19th century township surveys of Nevada.
As noted above, the collections of Nevada institutions
constitute by far the most useful sources of information for
cultural resource investigation, particularly for the Battle
Mountain District. At the University of California's
Bancroft Library, the most useful items are the Mining and
Scientific Press (which feature, among other things, articles
on technological developments and reports on mining activity
throughout the West) and reports of major mining companies
(many of which are on microfilm and thus available through
interlibrary loan). The Bancroft's map and photograph col-
lections, while extensive, place emphasis on California, the
West at large, and, in Nevada, on the Comstock. The Wells,
Fargo Bank's History Room is of very limited usefulness with
regard to the Battle Mountain District. The company's busi-
ness records are not open to the public, and its collections
are heavily biased in favor of California.
PAST AND CURRENT INVESTIGATIONS
Historical investigations within (or including) the
Battle Mountain District have to date taken two forms. The
first, represented by Welch (1979) and Goodwin (I966) is the
historical narrative, organized more or less thematically.
Goodwin's work is developed around the Humboldt River and its
sub-basins, and only the sections on the Battle Mountain,
Reese River, and Pine Valley sub-basins are pertinent to the
Battle Mountain District. Goodwin's emphasis is on trails,
railroads and mining. He provides an enormous amount of
detail, but it is not always well organized nor always per-
tinent to an understanding of past or existing cultural
resources. Welch covers more territory, geographically
speaking, and his narrative is more readable than Goodwin's.
Whereas Goodwin's practical intent is not entirely clear,
Welch has at least attempted to place known cultural
resources within some historic context. Welch's observations
on the nature of available documentation, and the resulting
bias in his (and other writers') work toward mining and the
19th century, are well taken. The principal shortcoming of
these studies is that they simply assemble data. There is
no attempt to evaluate the data nor interpret them in terms
of understanding the potential significance of a given cul-
tural resource or group of resources.
The second form of historical investigation to have
included areas of the Battle Mountain District is exclusively
site-oriented. The BLM's own, on-going inventory consists in
large part of recording resources as found in the course of
regular field work. Many of these resources have not been
researched, but have simply been described and mapped.
Others have not been visited at all. Exceptions are sites
included in the Bureau's Recreation Inventory System, which
have been researched, although to a very limited extent.
Another "field oriented" investigation is that being carried
out by URS/john A. Blume & Associates (San Francisco) for the
Department of Energy. Although this investigation (on-going
since 1965) is for the purpose of determining effects of
ground motion (from underground nuclear testing) on struc-
tures of all types and ages, it has resulted in three docu-
ments of limited distribution that among other things record
physical characteristics of many historic resources.
While the historic site recording projects of BLM and
URS /Blume tend to emphasize site description over library
research, other projects err in the opposite regard. Mordy
and McCaughey's (19o8) inventory of historic sites contains
good, though brief, data, but lacks, or gives only very
cursory attention to, information on the sites as they
presently exist. Texas Tech's Nevada Historic Engineering
Site study (1979-80) has also not benefited from field inves-
tigation, except in a very few cases, mostly in and around
Virginia City. Given the continuing attrition of Nevada's
cultural resources, the lack of proper descriptive data is
a serious shortcoming. It is, however, understandable, since
these resources are scattered throughout an enormous land
area, in difficult terrain and often accessible only by foot,
horseback, or four-wheel-drive vehicle.
The formal recognition of historic resources is limited
for the most part to the National Register of Historic
Places and the Nevada Historical Markers Program. National
Register properties within the Battle Mountain District
number only eight (four are in process), a number which does
no justice to the area's historical resources. The State
Marker Program selects sites using criteria largely based
upon those for the National Register. These sites are given
interpretive markers and in some cases, fences to inhibit
(if not prevent) vandalism. The list of marked sites is
periodically updated, and the State Historic Preservation
Office publishes guidebooks on the sites for interested
Nevada residents and tourists.
While the historical investigations described here have
their merits, they do not, individually or collectively,
function adequately as tools for comprehensive and informed
historic cultural resources identification. Such an identi-
fication program should combine, in equal measure, systematic
field investigation, physical inspection and description by
qualified professionals, photographic recording, historical
research •( both site-specific and contextual) and rigorous
evaluation of each resource or group of resources in terms
of integrity, historical association, and architectural form.
One or another of these elements is found in each of the
projects described here. However, only the BLM's Cultural
Resource Evaluation System (CRES) makes any attempt to
evaluate resources according to formal criteria or guidelines,
and application of this system (which emphasizes levels of
protection to be given various sites) has been seriously
hampered by lack of adequate data from which to make informed
judgments. To its credit, BLM has not assigned CRES ratings
arbitrarily, but the very large number of resources rated SO
(insufficient data) does not form a particularly useful data
base for management.
Besides methodological shortcomings, these various
historical investigations also lack, for the most part,
coherent research design. This lack in URS/Blume's work is
understandable, since Blume's recording projects are
fundamentally ground-motion, rather than cultural resource,
studies. Welch's overview of the BLM Shoshone and Eureka
planning districts is the best historical treatment of the
area to date, but as Welch himself recognizes, it is only
an introduction. Goodwin overwhelms the reader with histori-
cal trivia, and his work is largely useless as a planning
document. Mordy and McCaughey offer simply a descriptive
list (much like Stanley Paher's Nevada Ghost Towns and Mining
Camps (1970)) of places, useful as a reference but again not
grounded in serious historical analysis. While it has col-
lected some worthwhile information, Texas Tech's historic
engineering site survey lacks an overall framework for iden-
tification and selection of sites, and did not include an
adequate program of field investigation.
None of the past or current historical investigations in
the Battle Mountain District has addressed the fundamental
problem of how to distinguish historic resources from his-
torical remains. The various researchers and investigators
have produced lists of towns, camps, mines, roads, ranches
and other sites, with a number of such remains recurring
repeatedly; but the reasons for including any given site
are not clearly stated, or not discussed at all. A site
does not achieve historic significance simply by having
existed at some time in the past. An historically signifi-
cant resource must demonstrate qualities of integrity, proper
degree of association with persons, events or developments of
documented, and rigorously analyzed, importance, and/or must
contribute substantially and clearly to an understanding of
past lifeways and material culture. To date, a framework for
applying these criteria has not been established for the
Battle Mountain District.
Treatment of the Battle Mountain District's cultural
resources as architecture has been almost totally neglected.
Given the fact that few structures within the District
demonstrate the architectonic forms and attributes considered
important within the academic community of architectural
historians, this is understandable. Vernacular, or folk
architecture tends to fall "between the cracks" of traditional
architectural history and traditional historical writing, but
this is a shortcoming of those disciplines, rather than of
vernacular architecture. Of • all the historical investigations
known to have included the Battle Mountain District, only
URS/Blume's have addressed cultural resources from the
architectural viewpoint. URS/Blume has even developed a
preliminary typology for vernacular architecture within its
study area, although the firm has not gone beyond basic
description of various architectonic forms and use of
materials. While only a beginning, this work deserves
10
further consideration as a possible basis for developing an
understanding of the Battle Mountain District's historic
architectural resources.
11
CULTURAL RESOURCE RESEARCH AND INVESTIGATION PROJECT SUMMARY
1. Project Title: Nevada Historic Engineering Site
Inventory
2. Principal Investigator(s) : Dr. Joseph E. Minor (director,
History or Engineering Program, Texas Tech University,
Lubbock). Also Donald Abbe, et. al . staff researchers.
3- Sponsoring Institution: Heritage Conservation &
Recreation Service, through the Nevada Division of
Historic Preservation; and Texas Tech
k. Dates of Field Work: 1979
5. General Location of Field Work: State of Nevada
6. Purpose of Field Work: To develop a computerized inven-
tory of significant historic engineering sites in the
state of Nevada.
7- Field Procedures and Techniques:
-mailing of questionnaire to knowledgeable persons in
Nevada
-preliminary research to identify potential sites
-selection of a limited number of sites for field
investigation
-storage of basic information in machine-retrievable form
8. Project Results:
-computer printout inventory of over 1000 historic
engineering sites in Nevada
-preparation of several National Register nominations for
submission to the Nevada SHPO
-individual site files of documentary and field information
9. Evaluation of Project: Because the inventory was developed
principally through secondary library research (Paher
(1970) for example), the survey lacks both comprehensive-
ness and field data. Survey is biased toward the larger
towns and mining districts, and includes many "obliterated"
sites at the expense of yet-unidentified sites that may be
far more intact, and thus of more use in developing an
understanding of the varieties of technology to be found
in Nevada's historical past.
10. Records (i.e., reports, notes, and collections): Field
notes, photographs, research materials are available in
the History of Engineering Program, Texas Tech University,
Lubbock .
12
CULTURAL RESOURCE RESEARCH AND INVESTIGATION PROJECT SUMMARY
1. Project Title: Recreation Inventory System (Sightseeing)
2. Principal Investigator(s) : BLM staff
3- Sponsoring Institution: BLM, Battle Mountain District
4. Dates of Field Work: On-going
5. General Location of Field Work: Throughout Battle
Mountain District
6. Purpose of Field Work: To identify, describe, and
evaluate (for sightseeing potential) cultural resources
that appear to have historical significance or interest.
7. Field Procedures and Techniques:
-background historical research
-site investigation, description, photographs
8. Project Results: A series of short descriptive reports
on several hundred sites of potential public interest,
ranging from mining camps to ranches, roads, ruins, and
stagecoach stations. Presumably these reports can be
used in developing plans for historic site interpreta-
tion, sightseeing, etc. The Tonopah Planning Unit's
summary is separate from that of the Shoshone-Eureka
unit.
9- Evaluation of Project: Does not pretend to be a compre-
hensive summary of the district's cultural resources,
but does contain some good descriptive information.
Photographs are simply color snapshots, and do not serve
as a proper photographic record of the buildings and
structures, but do serve as information sources for the
immediate future .
10. Records (i.e., reports, notes, and collections): Field
notes and photos for Shoshone-Eureka areas are on file
at the Battle Mountain District office, as is a copy of
the Tonopah URA report. Field notes and photos for the
Tonopah URA are at Tonopah.
13
CULTURAL RESOURCE RESEARCH AND INVESTIGATION PROJECT SUMMARY
1. Project Title: Nevada Historical Sites
2. Principal Investigator (s ) : Brooke D. Mordy and Donald
McCaughey, Western Studies Center, Desert Research
Institute
3. Sponsoring Institution: State of Nevada, Department of
Conservation & Natural Resources
k. Dates of Field Work: 1967-68
5. General Location of Field Work: State of Nevada
6. Purpose of Field Work: To provide a basic, beginning
inventory of Nevada's historic resources; to incorporate
a portion of this work into the state's Historic
Preservation Plan (Volume II).
7. Field Procedures and Techniques:
-literature search
-photographic recording
8. Project Results:
-an inventory of approximately 1000 sites, located in all
parts of the state (including Lander, Nye and Eureka
Counties) ; published as Nevada Historic Sites in I968
by the University of Nevada, Reno.
9. Evaluation of Project: Emphasis is on the towns and
townsites featured in nearly every other local historical
work on Nevada. Brief historical accounts, lacking use-
ful information about past or existing condition of
physical remains. No architectural discussion. The work
serves as a handy reference, but does not in any way
function as a proper inventory or planning tool.
10. Records (i.e., reports, notes, and collections):
-photographs and research notes on file at Desert
Research Institute
14
CULTURAL RESOURCE RESEARCH AND INVESTIGATION PROJECT SUMMARY
1. Project Title: Survey of Historic Sites: Southern
Nevada and Death Valley (JAB-99-121) (1980, draft)
2. Principal Investigator! s ) : Charles Kensler, URS/John A .
Blume & Associates, Engineers, San Francisco
3. Sponsoring Institution: DOE-Nevada (Las Vegas)
k. Dates of Field Work: 1977 (principally)
5. General Location of Field Work: Central-southern Nevada,
west into Death Valley
6. Purpose of Field Work: To compile an inventory of 19th
and early 20th century buildings and structures that
appeared to have some cultural value, to record these
and to evaluate the effect of ground motion from under-
ground nuclear testing upon them.
7. Field Procedures and Techniques:
-extensive interviews with local persons, groups, agencies
knowledgeable about the area
-background secondary-source examination, using such works
as Angel's and Elliott's histories of Nevada, and Paher's
book on ghost towns
-field inspection, utilizing helicopters, airplanes and
four-wheel-drive vehicles; recording of structures
including measurements, detailed description of materials
and methods of construction; extensive photographic
coverage
8. Project Results:
-limited-distribution (for official use only) report,
still in draft form, that presents the building
descriptions, brief historical data, and an introduction
that attempts to develop a typology for some of the
area's vernacular architectural remains.
9. Evaluation of Project: This is by far the best historic
site investigation to have been conducted in the Battle
Mountain District. Sites are carefully described in a
professional manner, and often are placed in historical
context. The introduction includes a brief, but highly
pertinent, discussion of materials and methods of
construction.
10. Records (i.e., reports, notes, and collections): Field
notes, photographs, interview transcripts on file at
URS/Blume, San Francisco.
15
CULTURAL RESOURCE RESEARCH AND INVESTIGATION PROJECT SUMMARY
1. Project Title: Inventory of Structures: Southern
Nevada; Inventory of Structures; Central Nevada
2. Principal Investigator(s ) : Various staff of URS/John A.
Blume and Associates, Engineers (San Francisco)
3. Sponsoring Institution: DOE-Nevada (Las Vegas)
k. Dates of Field Work: 1964-69
5- General Location of Field Work: South and Central
Nevada
6. Purpose of Field Work: To locate, document and observe
structures and facilities surrounding the Nevada Test
Site and the Nuclear Rocket Development Station, for the
purposes of evaluating the possible effect of ground
motion resulting from nuclear or rocket testing.
7. Field Procedures and Techniques: Interviews with
representatives of public agencies, private organizations,
and individuals; on-site inspection for description and
photographing of resource.
8. Project Results: Two reports, JAB-99-43A and JAB-99-44A,
which have limited distribution, and which include, among
other things not germane to a cultural resources over-
view, brief physical descriptions of buildings and struc-
tures, estimated construction dates, and locational
information given in terms of latitude and longitude.
9- Evaluation of Project: It is not clear from the informa-
tion made available to this researcher just how sites had
been selected for study. The chief value of these first
two reports (see summary of URS/Blume's "Survey of
Historic Sites: Southern Nevada and Death Valley") is
that they provide some useful information about building
types and materials found in the areas of their concern.
Lack of photos in the reports is a problem.
10. Records (i.e., reports, notes, and collections): Field
records, photographs, and other materials are on file
(but not, we believe, available to the public) at URS/
Blume, San Francisco.
16
CENTRAL NEVADA: A THEMATIC INTERPRETATION
The Setting
Central Nevada lies in the western portion of the Great
Basin, a region of block-faulted mountain ranges oriented
primarily in a north-south direction. Lower spurs branch
between the major ranges, forming enclosed basins and long,
broad valleys, most 5000 feet or more above sea level.
Considered a true desert, the region receives little rainfall
(often less than 10 inches per year) due to the barrier
against Pacific stormfronts formed by the Sierra Nevada along
the western edge of the state. The climate is thus quite
dry, with bright, hot summers and often harsh winters.
Soils of central Nevada vary according to such factors as
parent rock, degree and direction of slope, drainage charac-
teristics and amount of rainfall. Most common are well-
drained gravelly soils, coarse to medium in texture, that
form on the lower reaches of alluvial fans and on portions
of the valley floor. Where the land is flat, soils are silty
deposits from prehistoric lakes, often strongly saline-alkali
affected and barren of plant life.
Dominant forms of natural vegetation are shadscale and
sagebrush at lower levels, with pinyon and juniper occurring
at 5000 to 8000 feet, often with an understory of sagebrush.
Hardy grasses, such as bunchgrass , often grow with, and some-
times dominate, sagebrush. Along watercourses, scattered
stands of willow or cottonwood may also be present.
The physical characteristics of the central Nevada
landscape greatly influenced the nature of the activities
that constitute the Battle Mountain District's history since
the mid-19th century. An arid land covered mostly by sage-
brush permitted little agriculture in the crop-raising sense,
but was sufficient for grazing. Lack of adequate moisture
and rich grasses inhibited development of a dairy industry:
the ranges were suitable only for hardy beef cattle and
sheep.
As in other places and other times in American history,
settlement patterns in central Nevada were largely determined
by the location of fresh water. Ranches were established at
springs, and in the foothills where streams flowed down from
the mountains. Mining camps and towns, however, were located
where ore was found, within the mountain ranges. Many suf-
fered from lack of sufficient water to meet human and indus-
trial needs. In those circumstances, camps were either
short-lived, or acquired water through construction of pipe-
lines and aqueducts.
17
Geologic activity, particularly during the late Tertiary
period, has had a profound impact upon central Nevada history.
The upthrust of the fault-block ranges, in chains running
north-south, was accompanied by mineralization that left rich
deposits of gold--and above all, silver. As a result, much
of the history of Nevada is centered around the history of
mining--the extraction and processing of ores. Unlike
California in the 1840 's and 1850 's, however, where gold was
often found in easily-worked placer deposits or readily pro-
cessed with stamp mills, Nevada's silver required high
degrees of capital investment and sophisticated technology.
The basic fact — that silver was particularly difficult to
extract and required extensive processing — meant that Nevada
mining history would be characterized by technological inno-
vation, such as amalgamation and smelting; by high proportions
of foreign-born miners from such areas as Wales, Ireland and
Cornwall that had long histories of mining activity; and by
almost "factorylike industrial relations" between corporate
owners and the miners (Paul 1963:57).
Like water, wood was also a scarce resource in central
Nevada, limited largely to the pinyon and juniper of the
mountain ranges. Charcoal kilns, still to be found in the
District, represent one of wood's most important economic
roles in the area's history--as a source of charcoal to fuel
the ore smelters. The scarcity of wood played a role in
encouraging the development of a few rather large smelters,
rather than many small ones, thus contributing further to the
corporate character of Nevada's mining history. Limited
supplies of wood for building resulted in another phenomenon:
as people left one dying mining town for one with better
prospects, they often dismantled their houses and store
buildings, and reconstructed them at the new site.
The character of the land has thus constituted the prin-
cipal factor in the way central Nevada has developed since
the first explorers followed the Humboldt across the country
to California. This theme will move like a thread through
the larger thematic treatment that follows. Although the
impact of this severe climate has been to some extent miti-
gated by transportation and technological developments, the
land is still desert country, and its history and the life-
ways of its inhabitants, past and present, must be understood
within the environmental context.
18
Exploration
"I started about the 22nd of August 1826, from the Great
Salt Lake . . . for the purpose of exploring the country S.W.
which was unknown to me . . ." (Goetzmann 1966:130)
The written record of Anglo-American exploration in
central Nevada begins with this letter from Jedediah Smith
to William Clark, then superintendent of Indian Affairs in
St. Louis. Smith, a trapper and partner in the Rocky
Mountain Fur Company, reached California late in 1826, after
a journey which took him south from Salt Lake to the
Colorado, then along the river to the Mojave valley, where he
entered California. Smith's return passage, in the spring
and summer of 1827 » included travel in a northeasterly direc-
tion from near Walker Lake, on a route roughly corresponding
to today's US 6 across the southern portion of the central
Nevada region (Goetzmann 1966:133-4).
Smith's route was one of three major east-west roads
through central Nevada in the 19th century, and though it was
first recorded, it was the last to be developed. More pro-
mising was the Humboldt valley, explored by Smith's Canadian
rival Peter Skene Ogden in 1828-29. and retraced in 1833 by
Joseph Walker (Goetzmann 1966:136, 151). The Humboldt was,
of the two routes, by far the most direct and hospitable path
to California. Its utility as an emigrant route to the
Pacific was demonstrated by the Bidwell-Bartelson party in
1841, followed by J. B. Chiles going east in 1843 and the
Stevens -Murphy party in 1844. Seven years later, George
Chorpenning opened the first California-Salt Lake mail route
through the Humboldt valley (Hafen 1926:63-66, Welch 1979:8).
While the first two routes across central Nevada were
first recorded by trappers and traders seeking new sources of
beaver and other furs, the third was located by another breed
of explorer. From about 1840, exploration in the far west
was "characterised by its clear relationship to national
political and economic aspirations" (Goetzmann 1966:232). The
federal government directed these quests, and the soldiers,
scientists and engineers who conducted them had very specific
questions to ask of the land. In the 1840 ' s basic problems
included establishing relations with Indian tribes, locating
military and supply routes, and reconnoitering potential
battlegrounds as preliminaries to a war with Mexico. Once
that war was concluded, the government expanded its scope of
inquiry to include, in the 1850's and 1860's, geological and
19
topographical investigations and identification of possible
routes for a transcontinental railroad.
The first government expedition, led by John C. Fremont,
was a military reconnaissance which in 1845 moved into the
study area in a southwesterly direction to Diamond Valley,
and then south along the Toiyabe range through Big Smoky
Valley (Goetzmann 1966:250-252; Elliott 1973*^-^5) • A
later expedition was led by Lt. E. G. Beckwith of the 3rd
Artillery, who continued John Gunnison's railroad survey
along the 38th parallel across the Great Basin to California
in 185^ (Welch 1979:5-6; Goetzmann 1966:288). That same
year, John Reese, a scout for Col. E. Steptoe, reconnoitered
the central Nevada valley which later bore his name.
In 1859 t Capt. James Simpson led an expedition through
the region that resulted in establishment of a third route
through central Nevada. Accompanied by Howard Egan, who had
explored the area previously (Welch 1979:6), Simpson located
a route from Camp Floyd, Utah, to Genoa, Nevada. Although
this route proved unsuitable for a railroad, an expedition
participant, Geologist Henry Engelmann, was able to develop "a
complete transcontinental profile from the Missouri to the
Pacific" (Goetzmann 1966:309)- The route was, however,
suited to wagon traffic, "such an improved route" that it was
quickly adopted by George Chorpenning's mail line, which had
been established originally along the Humboldt (Goetzmann 1966
293; Welch 1979:6). Known as the Egan-Simpson or Central route,
this road achieved nationwide publicity in I860, with the
inauguration of Russell, Majors and Waddell's Pony Express
mail service between San Francisco and Independence. The
service was short-lived (April 1860-October 1861) , but it
demonstrated the importance of the Central route--John
Butterfield's Overland Mail and Stage Co. was rerouted along
it in March 186l--and became almost instantly part of
American folklore (Hafen 1926:l65ff; Welch 1979:10).
The stations of the Pony Express and early Overland on
the Central route were perhaps the earliest structures asso-
ciated with the Euro-American presence in Central Nevada.
Within the study area there were eight, from Smith Creek on
the west to Diamond Spring on the east (USDOI, BLM 1975).
The old Pony Express route has been marked by BLM, and
archaeological investigation of two stations to the west (in the
BLM Carson City District) has resulted in information about
the structures themselves and about the lifestyles of the
company employees who staffed them (Hardesty 1979)- The
stations within the study area have not been as closely
examined, and there is but limited information about their
present condition. As part of the national iconography they
20
are eminently deserving of further study. The stations are
also important in a more local sense, for the Pony Express
brought to central Nevada the first of numerous stage and
freight stations that by the early 20th century could be
found along major (and often minor) roads and trails through-
out the region. This aspect of central Nevada history is
dealt with below, but it is necessary to establish the Pony
Express and early Overland stations as being simply the first
manifestations of a long Euro-American effort to develop
travel and transportation in a difficult and largely unpopu-
lated environment.
21
The Native American Experience
Development of the Humboldt and Central routes, although
they were at first only narrow paths through a very wide land
and were used by travellers simply passing through, had pro-
found implications for the native inhabitants. These were
the Paiute and Shoshone, who in family groups hunted small
game, gathered seeds and pinyon nuts, and set up camps at
many of the springs rising in the foothills or from the
valley floors. Prior to white occupation, the Western
Shoshone dominated most of the central Nevada region, with
southern Paiutes controlling the extreme southern end of the
area (Inter-Tribal Council of Nevada 1976c: 7). For the
Shoshone, the land along the Humboldt near Battle Mountain
was a "central area for rabbit drives, antelope drives and
festivals" (Inter-Tribal Council of Nevada 1976a:83). The
Reese River valley, with its year-round stream, was another
focal point of Shoshone life, part of a seasonal cycle of
migration that included springtime in Smith Creek valley, and
summer in lone valley and Reese River (Inter-Tribal Council
of Nevada 1976a: 89-90) .
Although attention of whites along the Humboldt and
Central routes was directed at first far beyond this area
of Nevada, the impact of travelers was immediate and negative.
Emigrants en route to California soon depleted game along
the Humboldt (Forbes 1969:50). Farther south, the Pony
Express and Overland stations, though they were few in number,
expropriated for their own use many of the Indians' most
important food-gathering sites. The Overland had "a monopoly
of the grass ... to feed their stock, which deprived [the
Shoshone] of the seed which they had . . . used as an article
of food" (Forbes 1967:80). By 1861, only a few years after
George Chorpenning had opened the Central route, Indian
resentment over loss of food sources was obvious enough to
have drawn attention from the military. Several Pony Express
stations were attacked in May I860, although they were
promptly rebuilt and business carried on as before (USDOI, BLM
1975 : 36ff). Certainly the Indians resented the white presence,
and food shortages were very real. In November 1861,
G. Wright reported to the Assistant Adjutant General that
"were it not for the starving conditions of the Indians, no
fears need be entertained about their committing depredations"
(Report to the Secretary of War 1889 i 20 Nov. 1861, n.p. ) .
The government moved swiftly to arrange treaties with tribes
all across northern and central Nevada (Connor to Drum,
27 Oct. 1863, in Report to the Secretary of War, 1889).
Although the government somewhat belatedly established
reservations for Northern Paiutes near Pyramid and Walker
22
Lakes in 1875 » Indians in central Nevada were left to fend
for themselves until well into the 20th century. Their
lands overrun with miners , ranchers and farmers , the Shoshone
and Paiute were forced to abandon their traditional hunting-
gathering lifeways and rely instead on the white economy
(Forbes 1969:61). Fortunate men found employment as farm
laborers, herders or cowhands, and women as house servants
(Forbes 1969:60, 61; Inter-Tribal Council of Nevada 1976a:
89 i 91). Many more, however, gathered at the edges of white
population centers, where, according to a census enumerator
in 1880, they had "no regular occupation but do everything
in the way of wood chopping and chores among families such
as washing etc. the government does not support them"
(Federal census, 1880, Eureka County). Census takers in 1880
counted significant concentrations of Indians in the Austin
area, Grass, Big Smoky and Reese River valleys, and "working
for whites" in and around Belmont and Tybo . Although most
were simple laborers, ranch hands, or wholly unemployed,
Indians in the Eureka area, at least, found work as hunters
(Alpha, Pine Station and Mineral Hill, for example). In at
least one mining camp, Ellsworth, Indians worked at the
"pans, settlers, concentrators and furnaces" of the mill
(Angel 1881:523)- Regardless of their employment, however,
native peoples remained on the fringes of white society:
census enumerators seldom bothered to take their names (real
or Anglo), and in one case referred to a native community as
containing "125 head" (Federal Census, 1880, Nye County).
Not until the 20th century did the federal government
make specific provision for native peoples in central Nevada.
In 1917 » a "colony" was established near Battle Mountain, and
under the Indian Reorganization Act of 193^ the government
built houses, and later a community center, there (Inter-
Tribal Council of Nevada 1976a: 84). The Shoshone of Reese
River, although invited to move to the Duckwater area in the
1870' s, refused. Their tenacity was rewarded in 193^ 1 when
the Yomba Reservation was established in upper Reese River,
on which the Shoshone have developed cattle herds and grow
alfalfa (Inter-Tribal Council of Nevada 1976a:9D-
23
Mining: The Context
Very little is known about early mining activity in the
western Great Basin. Native peoples left stone hammers as
evidence of their workings in the Wood turquoise mine in the
Crescent District of Clark County, and other prehistoric
artifacts have been found in the salt mines of southern
Nevada. The first organized mining activity of the historic
period is credited to Franciscan monks, who worked several
gold placer deposits, silver lode mines, and turquoise
deposits, also in what is now Clark County, in the late
1700' s. Indian converts most likely provided the labor for
these efforts, and the deposits were probably located in
conjunction with the Spanish establishment of the trail from
Santa Fe to Los Angeles. In 1849 the Mormons, as part of
their effort to establish the far-flung "State of Deseret,"
discovered placer gold at the mouth of Gold Canyon, in
western Nevada. These marginal placers were worked for
nearly a decade, although by non-Mormons for the most part.
Mormons were also responsible for early mineral exploration
in what is now the Yellow Pine District in Clark County. In
1855 a. party of Mormons returning from California on the
"Old Spanish Trail" discovered lead deposits which were
designated as the Potosi Mine. After several abortive
attempts at smelting this ore, the Mormons succeeded in
building a crude furnace at Las Vegas, which produced five
tons of lead. (Outline of Nevada Mining History, 1964:1, 2),
The 1850 's brought heavy traffic through Nevada, as gold
seekers, their eyes intent on California, hurried along the
Humboldt Route to the placer fields opened in the wake of
the Sutter's Mill discovery in 1848. While the Humboldt
Valley certainly felt the impact of these travelers, more
remote portions of central Nevada remained relatively
undisturbed.
In the 1860's, however, Central Nevada was opened to
widespread exploration and mining operations were begun in
newly discovered districts in many areas of the state.
Three important events set the stage for the central
Nevada boom. First was the discovery of placer gold at
Sutter's Mill, California, in 1848. This event attracted
national, and indeed, international attention, and thousands
came to the state dreaming of California gold. The second,
related, event was the discovery of the mother lode for
those mediocre Gold Canyon placers, near the Placerville
cut-off of the Humboldt Route. In 1859. Henry Comstock
24
staked a claim on top of a lode which would bear his name,
and which would be so rich that "Corns tock" would be synony-
mous around the world with gold and silver. This discovery,
together with the nearly simultaneous discovery of very rich
placer gold deposits near Pike's Peak in Colorado turned the
eyes of gold seekers toward the area east of California, and
during the next decade, these energetic men would explore
nearly every mile of the dry, rocky Great Basin, as well as
large portions of Colorado (see note 1).
Although the search was rewarding in central Nevada, the
precious metals found there were rarely in the then familiar
form of placer deposits (nearly pure. native gold could be
extracted with little more than the help of gravity) . While
there were a few free gold deposits in central Nevada, most
deposits had much more complex mineralization, and the gold
was found as sulfates and sulfides, and in conjunction with
lead, silver, zinc and other elements. Moreover, these
deposits were hardrock, not placer deposits, and were located
hundreds of feet under ground in solid beds of rock. These
deposits required complex technological solutions to problems
of extraction and reduction. Thus the nineteenth century
Nevada mining experience was characterized by large amounts
of capital investment and organized, cooperative labor.
Nevada's twentieth century mining has taken place
largely outside of central Nevada; the discovery of gold and
silver in south-central Nevada at the turn of the century set
off the state's second period of concentrated discovery and
development of precious metals districts. This second boom
lasted about fifteen years.
World War I and the technological changes of the early
twentieth century brought with them a different American
society, dependent on automobiles and electricity, no longer
predominantly rural. A wide range of raw materials was
required by this society, and its demand for copper could no
longer be met entirely by the mines of the upper penninsula
of Michigan. The first copper mine to operate on a large
scale in Nevada was near Ely; it began operations in 1903-
19C4. In conjunction with the twentieth century copper boom,
a significant amount of methodical minerals exploration
occurred all over the state of Nevada. Mostly, these efforts
have sought to find profitable base metal deposits associated
with the many abandoned silver, lead, and gold districts.
Central Nevada mines have also produced some semi-precious
turquoise, barite, antimony and other industrial minerals in
the twentieth century.
25
■ Argenfa
• Copper Basin
■Old Battle Mountain
Galena i
Cortez
LANDER COUNTY
■ Ravenswood
■New Pass
Yankee Blade
JacobsviHe. S A ustri
„ _, Clifton
Canyon Crty«
Clinton
"■Geneva
■Washington 'G^a^ara
■ aKhgston
San Juan
Park Canyon ■
■Ophir Canyon
EUREKA COUNTY
NYE COUNTY
Diamond Cityi
■ Mineral Hill
_ . "Eurelfa
■ Columbia
■Belmont
■ Morey
■Hot C-eek
Grant City»
■Troy
Map 2= Central Nevada Mining Camps, 1862-1869
26
-•Battle Mountain — .
■Copper Canyon
■ Lewis
LANDER COUNTY
i Alpha
EUREKA COUNTY
■Jett
■Jefferson
■Barcelona
_J.
■ Danville
Ruby Hi.
Vanderbfl"
NYE COUNTY
■Tybo
Map 3= Central Nevada Mining Camps, 1870-1879
27
Pittsburg*
LANDER COUNTY
Ledfe.
._[.
EUREKA COUNTY
Prospecti
NYE COUNTY
Map 4= Central Nevada Mining Camps, 1880-1899
28
LANDER COUNTY
■ Mfctl
•Round Mountah
Central City
■ ■ ■Monarch
Manhattan
Baxter Spring
EUREKA COUNTY
NYE COUNTY
■Tonopah
■ Hamapah Orfford
■ Eltendale
■ BeHehelen
■ Golden Arrow
.Silverbow
Map 5 : Central Nevada Mining Camps, 1900-1909
29
■ mt op
i McCoy
LANDER COUNTY
_J.
EUREKA COUNTY
NYE COUNTY
Map 6= Central Nevada Mining Camps, I9IO-I920
i Arrowhead
30
Mining;: The Central Nevada Experience
The first major discovery of precious metals in central
Nevada took place in Pony Canyon near the Pony Express/
Overland road. In May 1862 William Talcott made the initial
discoveries in what became known as the Reese River District.
A rush soon developed, and within six months Lander County
was created from parts of Humboldt and Churchill counties,
with Jacobsville (soon replaced by Austin) as the seat of
government. By 1867 there were 11 mills and more than 3.000
mining claims in the district, despite the fact that the
district's ore was not effectively reduced until development
of the Reese River roasting process in 1869-
In 1865. the Manhattan Silver Mining Company began a
systematic effort to acquire the majority of the properties
in the district, beginning with the purchase and rebuilding
of the Oregon Milling and Mining Company's mill in Upper
Austin. By operating a large and efficient mill, the
company hoped to drive other mills out of business. Acqui-
sition of individual mines followed, and by 1877. the
Manhattan Co. owned and operated all the principal mines and
mills of Reese River.
The Manhattan mill closed in 1887, when the value of the
ore mined and milled by the company became insufficient to
support the operations. Between 1887 and 1891 the Manhattan
Co. went through several reorganizations that ended in the
incorporation of the Austin Mining Company. The Austin
company immediately set to work on two projects intended to
revive the Reese River District. The first was construction
of a drainage tunnel (first begun in 1871) from Clifton into
Lander Hill. The aim was to drain the major mines of the
district and at the same time provide an efficient means of
transporting ore to the company's new mill (the second
revitalization project) at the tunnel's mouth at Clifton.
These efforts to rejuvenate the district were doomed
to failure, however, and neither tunnel nor mill was com-
pleted as planned. The first setback occurred in 1893 with
the demonetization of silver and the resultant drop in silver
prices. The I896 electoral defeat of William Jennings Bryan,
a strong advocate of the free coinage of silver, sealed the
fate of silver mining in Austin as well as many other dis-
tricts in the west. The final blow to the Austin Mining
Company came in 1897 when company directors discovered that
the firm's superintendent, P. T. Farnsworth, had embezzled
more than $300,000 of the company's bullion and had rerouted
a great deal of equipment destined for the new Clifton mill
to his own operations in Utah. These events fatally crippled
the company, and by autumn of I898 all the mines in the
31
district were decommissioned and abandoned. Machinery in the
Clifton mill was salvaged and the remaining structure
dynamited (Welch 1979; Goodwin 1966 ; Angel 1881).
The Reese River District never measured up to people's
hopes for another Corns tock. The total production of the
district from 1865 to 19^0 amounted to less than $19 million,
$16 million of this credited to the Manhattan Silver Mining
Company. Annual bullion production fluctuated from $500,000
to $1 million between 1865 and 1885, with $1.5 million in
1878 being the highest annual production. From 1886 until
19^-0, the annual production exceeded $300,000 only twice, in
1886 and in 1889 .
Although the Reese River District was a disappointment
to the miners and investors, it did prove that central Nevada
held precious metals, and thus prompted further exploration
of the area. From Austin, mining discoveries quickly spread
into upper Reese River Valley and into Big Smoky Valley. In
1862 the camps of Canyon City, Washington, and San Juan were
established on the western slope of the Toiyabe Range. On
the eastern slope Clinton, Geneva, Guadalajara, Kingston,
Bunker Hill, Park Canyon and Ophir Canyon were established
in the middle and late 1860's. Prospectors also ranged far
beyond this region, covering all of central Nevada in their
search for gold and silver. The dozens of districts they
opened in the 1860*s, some attracting interest for only a few
months and some for much longer, might be represented by the
following examples .
In northern Lander County the Battle Mountain district
included the towns of Copper Basin and Galena. Some of the
ore from this area was very rich, so rich that it proved
profitable to ship it to Swansea, Wales for smelting (at the
time, the Welsh had some of the most advanced smelting
technology available) (Lincoln 1923:106-107; Stager 1977:72).
The Cortez District, southeast of Battle Mountain, was dis-
covered by prospectors from Austin in I863. Developed
principally through the efforts of Simeon Wenban, Cortez
showed a sporadic production record until well into the
twentieth century (Lincoln 1923:86; Emmons 1910:108).
In central Nye County, the Belmont district was dis-
covered in 1865, and the Hot Creek district in 186?. Two
years after the discovery of the Belmont district, the town
of Belmont became Nye county seat. Although most of the
mines there were shut down by 1885, Belmont retained its
political status until 1905- Hot Creek, later part of the
Tybo district, enjoyed a modest prosperity in the mid and
late 1870's, its smelters producing large quantities of
silver and lead. But as the 20th century approached, the
32
district's fortunes waned (Angel 1881:519-520, 529; Krai
1951:191; Lincoln 1923:160, 195).
Silver was also discovered in the Reveille Range, in
1866. The Reveille District probably started with great
promise, and several mills were built. Eleven years later,
however, the major properties were consolidated under the
Gila Silver Mining Company and by 1880 the camp was nearly
abandoned (Angel 1881:526; Lincoln 1923:179).
In the southeast portion of the study area the Troy
district was discovered in 1867. The town of Troy was laid
out in 1869 and a British company purchased many of the
mines. But the 20-stamp mill and furnaces it built shut
down in 1872 (Lincoln 1923:195).
During the 1870's there were fewer new districts dis-
covered, and many of these were located near, and geologi-
cally related to, districts developed in the previous decade.
In 1874, the Tybo portion of the Hot Creek district was dis-
covered and was largely responsible for the overall pros-
perity of that region. The Copper Canyon area of the Battle
Mountain district also dates from this decade (Krai 1951:191;
Stager 1977:72) .
Although not initially very promising, the Eureka
District proved to be the richest mining district discovered
in central Nevada during the 19th century. Several thousand
tons of extremely rich ore were mined in the first five
years after the district was discovered in 186*4-. However
this ore could not successfully be reduced by milling, and
the initial locators lacked the necessary capital or skills
to develop alternative reduction methods. Two attempts, in
1866 and 1868 were made to smelt Eureka ores, but these
ended in failure. In 1869, Maj. W. W. McCoy built a small
furnace and demonstrated for the first time that the rich
silver-lead ore of Eureka could be successfully smelted.
During the next year several other small smelters were built
in the district (Angel 1881:430-431).
The major impact of McCoy's success was that it con-
vinced outside capitalists that the district was a worthy
investment. In 1870 the Eureka Consolidated Mining Co. was
incorporated in San Francisco 'to acquire one group of claims
in the district. The following year the Richmond Consolidated
Mining Co. (also of San Francisco) acquired another group of
claims. Both companies built large smelters and production
increased dramatically--from $107,900 in 1869 to $1.4 million
in 1870. Eureka's production remained well above the
million-dollar mark and reached its height of $5.2 million in
1878. By 1885, however, the major orebodies were exhausted
33
and problems of water deep in the mines halted any major
exploration work for new bodies. Limited mining continued
for the next six years under the leasing system, but the
district was clearly in decline, the Richmond and Eureka
smelters closing in 1890-91. A revival started in 1906 with
the merger of the Richmond and Eureka Companies and con-
struction of a new smelter. It was cut short in 1910 when
flash floods washed out the railroad between the mines and
smelter, and also Eureka's rail link to the north, the
Eureka' and Palisade Railroad. In the 1930' s and 1950's,
several companies conducted explorations in an effort to
locate new orebodies in the Eureka area, but water still
proved a problem and little worthwhile ore was found (Nolen
1962:2-3) .
The decade of the 1890' s was generally a time of depres-
sion for Nevada's mining industry. No major districts were
developed during this decade, and many districts discovered
during the 1860*s and 1870's were running out, or had already
run out, of ore that could be profitably mined. In addition,
the price of silver began to fall in I89I. and fell dramati-
cally with the demonetization of silver in 1893- This
depression can be seen clearly in Graph I (Yearly Production
of All Districts in Eureka, Lander and Nye counties, I865-
19^0). Nationally, the focus of the precious metals industry
shifted to the newly-discovered districts in the Dakotas,
Idaho and Colorado during the late 1870's and the two sub-
sequent decades. This shift is suggested by Nevada's popula-
tion decline between 1880 (59,463) and 1900 (37,119). as many
people left the state for more prosperous districts.
Twentieth century mining in Central Nevada opened with
Jim Butler's discovery of silver on Mt. Oddie in 1900.
Although the Tonopah mining district was rapidly organized,
its location nearly 100 miles from any railroad or sizable
town hindered development for several years . The many mining
investment frauds and swindles of the 19th century also made
most outside investors extremely unwilling to invest in an
unproven district miles from anywhere (see note 2) . As a
result, the first year and a half of mining at Tonopah was
undertaken by leasing portions of mines to individuals to
work. Mine owners received 25$ of the net proceeds after the
operating costs. In this way risks involved in the search
for ore were assumed by the lessee, who provided the operating
expenses. It is interesting to note that, previously, the
leasing system had been used only in Nevada mining districts
that were on the decline.
The operations at Tonopah under the leasing system quite
clearly showed that the district warranted outside investment
>
>-
z
z
>-
•D
3
H
Z
D
O
o
o
<£.
<
O
U
i*:
o
Q
UJ
Z
en
UJ
<
D
>
_l
U)
z
o
(1)
c
o
w-
<D
T5
C
Q
O
LU
o
0}
I
m
CD
CO
c
o
o
c
o
C
C
<
"o
0)
<
Q.
o
(OOO'OOO'lf)
35
and the systematic development of the mines that such invest-
ment would allow. By mid-1901 a Grass Valley (California)
mining promoter, representing several Philadelphia capi-
talists, arranged to purchase Butler's claims. From these
the Tonopah Mining Company was organized. In late 1902
claims adjacent to those of the Tonopah Mining Co. were pur-
chased by another group of Philadelphia investors, and
organized as the Tonopah-Belmont Mining Company. These two
companies accounted for 60$ of the district's total produc-
tion ($146,336,102) from 1901 through 1940.
The influx of outside investment served to organize the
district and increase its production. Between 1901 and 1906,
however, transportation of ore to mills in California and
central and western Nevada, and of supplies and equipment
into the district, presented a serious problem. In 1904 a
rail line was completed between Tonopah and the Carson and
Colorado Railroad 60 miles to the west in Esmeralda County.
But the Tonopah Railroad (later extended south to Goldfield)
only served as a partial solution to the district's problems.
While it became easier to bring equipment and supplies into
the district, the district's total output was limited by the
amount of ore that could be shipped out for reduction. In
1906 several mining companies constructed mills to reduce
ore locally, thus bypassing the transportation bottleneck
(Krai 1951: passim, Lincoln 1923:184-195).
Tonopah was only the first of several districts dis-
covered in Central Nevada in the first decade of this century.
In 1902 the Goldfield District, thirty miles south of Tonopah,
was organized. Whereas Tonopah was a silver district,
•Goldfield produced more than $86 million in gold. Within the
study area several other districts were discovered, although
none proved as rich as Tonopah or Goldfield. The Bellehellen
district in central Nye County was discovered in 1905. but no
production is credited to that district until 1918, and then
only $29,473' Silverbow was discovered 30 miles south of the
Bellehelen district in 1904, and shipped its first bullion
in 1906. There reportedly was a two-stamp mill in operation
there in 1913. and a larger mill was built in 1929- The
production of the district was, however, quite sporadic, and
"It is believed that the mill operated but a short time"
(Krai 1951:162) .
In 1906 two districts were identified on the western
slopes of the Toquima Range: Round Mountain and Manhattan.
Although they had rather sporadic records, both of these
districts had periods of five to seven years when their
annual production was in excess of $100,000. Round Mountain
and Manhattan are noteworthy because they represent the first
36
time placer raining operations had taken place in the state
on any significant scale.
Placer mining is relatively rare in Nevada, because
little of the state's gold occurs in the free form necessary
for placer deposition. However, there were lode deposits in
the Round Mountain and Manhattan districts, as well as in
the Battle Mountain,, Bullion, and Hilltop districts (all in
northern Lander Co.) and in the Union and Twin River dis-
tricts (Nye Co.) that contained significant quantities of
free gold, and stream characteristics were such in these
districts that the deposition of placer gold did occur.
In all but the Round Mountain, Manhattan and Battle
Mountain districts, these placer deposits were small and
their yields probably less than $100,000 each. Round Moun-
tain enjoyed an early period of relatively high production
beginning in 1908 and running through 1919 or 1920. During
this period several lode mines and numerous placer opera-
tions in the district produced between $250,000 and $500,000
a year. In 1908 several hydraulic monitors were in operation,
with water obtained from a 9-mile pipeline across Big Smoky
Valley from Jett Canyon (Vanderberg 1936:133-1^5). Manhattan'
early production record is somewhat more sporadic, exceeding
$200,000 only three times between 1906 and 1930. Round
Mountain and Manhattan enjoyed revivals during the 1930 's and
saw large-scale placer mining. Manhattan's most productive
period of placer mining was between 1938 and 19^6, during
the operation of the Manhattan Gold Dredging Company's
floating bucket line dredge. The dredge, which floated in a
pond made from water piped 12 miles from Peavine, worked
nearly five miles of Manhattan Gulch, creating large mounds
of tailings in its wake. During its 8 years of operation in
the district, the dredge recovered 133*000 ounces of gold
($4.5 million) (Krai 1951:115).
In 19^7 the Manhattan dredge was taken apart and moved
to an alluvial fan at the mouth of Copper Canyon in the
Battle Mountain district. Placer gold had been discovered
in this district in 1909- Because of their depth, most of
the placers were at first worked by drifts (tunnels) and
shafts, with several still in operation in the 1930 's. As
in Manhattan, dredging proved the most successful method for
recovering placer gold in the district. Between 1948 and
1955 the dredge recovered over 100,000 ounces of gold.
Between their discovery and 1968, placer gold recovered in
the Round Mountain district amounted to 232,000 ounces;
Manhattan, 210,000 oz.; and Battle Mountain, 156,000 oz .
(Johnson 1973) •
37
Between I860 and 1940 mining districts of Eureka,
Lander and Nye Counties produced $279,687,785 in silver,
gold, lead, zinc, copper, and other metals. Nearly half of
this production came from the Tonopah district ($146,336, 102) .
Next highest was the Eureka district ($52,288,02*0, and
Reese River was third ($18,494,209). (Appendix A lists the
total production of each individual district within the
BLM Battle Mountain District) .
Many chroniclers of Nevada history have tried to make
some order out of the state's mining history by identifying
several periods characterized by the level of production.
Using this approach they describe two cycles in the state's
mining industry. The first begins in 1849 and ends in 1899.
It is further divided into four periods: Discovery (1849-
1868), Prosperity (1869-1880), Decline (1881-1891) and
Depression (1892-1899). The second cycle begins with the
opening of the 20th century and is also divided into
periods: Discovery (1900-1907), Prosperity (1908-1918),
Decline (1919-1934) and Revival (1935-) (for example see
"Outline of Nevada Mining History, 1964:1, 13-24). Because
these periods and cycles are based on annual production
they are, in effect, a chronicle of the seven largest
districts in the state: the Comstock, Reese River, Eureka,
and Pioche during the early cycle, and Tonopah, Goldfield
and Ely during the later cycle-. The production histories
of these large districts tend to overshadow those of the
many smaller districts. And while production history and the
total dollar value of that production are interesting
aspects of the state's mining history, characterization of
that history or the history of a single mining district
solely on this basis can lead to oversimplification of a most
complex subject.
Production figures were (and are) important to mining
company investors and stockholders, and to city, county,
state and federal tax collectors because they represent the
final return in a lengthy and complex industrial process.
However, these figures shed little, if any, light on the
type and scale of human activity that occurred in mining
districts, or on remains from that activity. While produc-
tion figures determined the significance of a district as a
producer of metals, it will be the technological, economic
and social history of mining and associated activities in
the district that should be the central issue in determining
the cultural significance of a mining district.
In order to familiarize the reader with the pattern of
events occurring over the lifetime of a mining district, the
38
next section will outline in general terms the history
of a "typical" mining district in central Nevada during
the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Although not a
chronicle of any particular district, it should provide a
basic framework within which individual districts can be
studied (for short historical summaries of each district
within the study area, see Appendix A). The final section
of the chapter will discuss the mining technologies used in
central Nevada during this period.
39
Mining: The Pattern of Development
Development of most 19th century mining districts
followed essentially the same pattern: discovery; exploita-
tion and possibly abandonment; consolidation and the develop-
ment of industrialized mining; decline; abandonment (or
revival) .
Initial discovery was seldom made by professional
exploration geologists, but rather by self -trained, or
untrained, individuals. As a result, luck played a more
important role in the discovery of a district than did any
knowledge of mineralogy or orogenesis. Lack of such know-
ledge was not, however, crucial. These prospectors were
seeking precious metals deposits, and the location of such
deposits required knowledge of only a limited range of
mineral types.
Discovery of a district quickly touched off a rush, with
hundreds or sometimes thousands of people hoping to lay claim
to a rich piece of ground or to set up lucrative business
among the miners. The subsequent development of the district
and its camp(s) has been characterized by historians as
impermanence, "instability and a high percentage of wasted
effort" (Paul 1963:101). Despite great hope and effort, many
districts and their associated communities died before they
were well-established. Most 19th century precious metals
districts in central Nevada simply were not large enough to
be very long-lived.
Almost immediately after discovery and organization of
a district, some of the original locators sold their claims,
either to other people in the district or to promoters and
entrepreneurs who arrived toward the end of the rush, and
moved on to seek gold and silver elsewhere. The first serious
mining operations were primitive; their major purpose was to
remove the richest and most easily-obtained high-grade ore.
These first mining operations also provided a glimpse of
the extent of the orebodies in the district. While it was
rare that any of these first operations went as deep as 100
feet, it was often possible to gain some idea of the possible
size and richness of the orebodies at depth. It was at this
point--three months to perhaps a year after initial discjvery
and rush--that the district reached its first critical point.
Problems arose that called into question the pace of future
development of a district—and possibly its future existence.
Several of the problems were posed by nature: geo-
graphical location of the district, weather, nature of the
ore, and availability of wood and water. Although few
40
districts were totally abandoned because of severe weather,
the development of many was slowed. Availability of water,
for milling and for drinking, and of wood, for heating and
bracing for the mines, could present a difficult problem
for miners and merchants of the district. As the population
of the district grew, the few nearby springs or streams
rapidly became inadequate sources of potable water. Often
the mines were wet enough to provide water for milling, but
such water was seldom suitable for human consumption. If
the mines were very wet, the miners had the expense and
bother of trying to keep them pumped out.
Lack of wood began to create problems for the residents
of a district as soon as easily harvested timber in the
immediate proximity had been cut. If the ground proved
unstable at depth, the miners too began to have problems.
Without wood they could not mine because they could not sup-
port the sides and roofs of their workings.
By far the most serious difficulties, however, could lie
with the ore itself. If initial work in the district showed
that the ore was too poor to justify working it, that there
was not a great deal of it, or that there were metallurgical
problems with processing it, the district's viability was
threatened. In the first case the district was abandoned,
perhaps to enjoy a revival when the price of the metals found
in the district rose, and/or when milling technology made
working the ores of the district economically feasible. A
district which seemed to contain only small amounts of ore
was not necessarily abandoned forthwith: there were
generally a few people willing to operate a small mine in
the hope that more ore would be found.
Metallurgical problems were usually solved sooner or
later. Mining and milling on the Comstock had solved the
problem of reducing ore containing free gold and silver as
well as sulfides and sulfates. In central Nevada two of the
largest districts discovered presented distinctly different
metallurgies: Reese River ores were contaminated with
arsenic and antimony, and Eureka's were in some cases more
than half lead. In both cases the richness of the ores
provided the incentive to develop necessary reduction tech-
niques. Until the University of Nevada developed the cyanide
milling process in 1896, these three reduction processes
(Washoe pan amalgamation, Reese River roasting and amalga-
mation, and Eureka smelting) were used throughout the mining
west with only minor modifications, often making it possible
to work the ores of a district previously abandoned.
Before many long-lasting solutions to problems of
transportation and supply were developed, the basic decision
41
of whether the district was worth further investment had to
be answered by many individuals: merchants, investors,
miners, freighters. All these people made their decisions
more on faith and hope than on any hard facts regarding
future prospects. However, if the collective decision was
that the district was viable, the residents and others
associated with the district developed a general enthusiasm,
a "team spirit," about their district. In part this spirit
was founded in the desire to be part of another Corns tock;
but it also reflected both a desire to put down a few roots
and the gambler's faith in what seemed to be a winning hand.
The district having survived its first test--a crisis
of confidence as much as a test of possibilities—outside
individuals and companies began to purchase claims and invest
in larger-scale development. The result was the establish-
ment of far more industrialized mining than had previously
been the case. It was characterized by well-ordered, highly
structured organization and the existence of owners and
financial backers perhaps thousands of miles from the
operations .
Industrialization affected the mining society as well.
One principal characteristic of any industrialized society--
local, regional or national — is an elaborate division of
labor between one group of wage earners and shift workers,
and another group consisting of managers, technicians and
financiers. As industrialized mining moved into central
Nevada, the man working at the mine face was no longer able
to share in the risks and profits of the mine. Instead, he
received a wage based on the time worked, while others took
the risks of operating the mine, made the decisions, and
hoped to share the wealth. Urbanization accompanied the
rise of industrialized mining as miners brought families
to the camps, hoping to establish a stable life. The same
confidence that brought outside investment also encouraged
merchants to build substantial and permanent business houses.
Industrialized mining also meant construction of large-
scale reduction facilities in close proximity to the mines.
Having mills close by the mines obviated the serious and
expensive problem of transporting ore outside the district
for reduction. It also allowed mines to operate on a scale
limited only by the capacity of the mills, rather than the
limits of a transportation system.
Construction of mills within the district relieved one
source of pressure on the transportation systems serving the
area, but those systems could be severely tested by the
industrialization and urbanization of the district. Although
the material requirements of small and/or short-lived
42
districts were never so great that transportation difficul-
ties could not be solved by more teamsters and freighters
entering the market, such was not the case for the three
largest, Reese River, Eureka and Tonopah. In all three dis-
tricts, there was a tremendous need for inexpensive trans-
portation of large quantities of timber and wood, machinery
of all descriptions, and countless consumer goods. Mine
owners correctly realized that construction of a railroad
would lower transportation costs by 60-75%', local business-
men and civic leaders considered a railroad a matter of civic
pride. Both groups realized that lower freight costs resul-
ting from railroad construction could bring greater profits
and longevity to the district. Thus Eureka obtained a rail-
road in 1875; Austin in 1880; Tonopah in 1904.
The Eureka and Palisade Railroad was originally char-
tered to haul ore to proposed smelters at Palisade. The con-
struction of numerous smelters in the Eureka District, parti-
cularly those of the Richmond and Eureka Consolidated
companies, removed this part of the railroad's business.
However, the railroad earned a considerable amount of revenue
hauling freight into Eureka and taking bullion and lead in-
fots out. Indeed, in 1880 the railroad reported a profit of
248,323 on hauling 40,000 tons of freight to and from
Eureka. That the mines and smelters were important customers
is apparent from the fact that during 1880 the Eureka and
Palisade hauled 6, .000 tons of coal and 8,600 tons of lumber
into the district: nearly 2/3 of the total freight. The
railroad's long-term fortunes were thus intimately tied to
those of the district; both began their declines in 1885.
The Nevada Central Railroad, from Austin to Battle
Mountain, was not completed until production in the Reese
River district began to fail. At the time of its construc-
tion many felt that Austin could not adequately support the
line. The Nevada Central may have slowed Austin's decline
somewhat, due to the inexpensive transportation it afforded,
but in and of itself the line was unable to maintain the
town's prosperity.
If there were any lessons to be learned from the experi-
ences of the Nevada Central and the Eureka -Palisade, the major
one was that to be successful a railroad had to be built
drring the early years of a district's life. The owners of
the Tonopah Mining Co. fully realized this, and saw too that
prompt linkage with existing rail transportation would
facilitate rapid development of the district. Tonopah 's
development was indeed swift, and the inexpensive trans-
portation afforded by its railroad was undoubtedly central to
this success.
43
The rise of industrialized mining in a district did not
necessarily mean that the district was profitable or that
it would last a long time. There were countless districts,
begun with high hopes, that grew quickly and then collapsed
(see Note 3). Often however, industrialized mining meant
that activity in a district might be prolonged. Industri-
alization, with its large investment and elaborate systems
of operation and organization, produced a momentum that
could carry the district well beyond the logical point of
abandonment. Austin is one example of this effect, albeit
undocumented. The only thoroughly documented example of this
phenomenon is White Pine District in eastern Nevada. White
Pine enjoyed a spectacular boom in the late 1860's but pro-
duced less than $10 million in its early years. However, the
district held on for nearly 15 years, with heavy investments
from British syndicates. Eureka and Tonopah probably
experienced the same slow decline prolonged by renewed
exploration and development work, though the documentation
is less complete for these districts.
The peak of production in a district generally coin-
cided with the industrial phase of development, due in part
simply to the scale of operations. However, large scale
mining operations also hastened the exhaustion of the known
orebodies . The decline was marked first by shrinking bullion
output, and then by closing of the mines and mills and an
exodus of people from the district. In larger districts,
the decline could be long and slow, marked by work force
reductions and the closing of smaller, less efficient mills.
The decline could also be slowed by continued or heightened
exploration and development work. Often another wave of
consolidation occurred, as a way of more efficiently working
the mines. If a revival did not take place, a district's
last gasp could be the resumption, or introduction, of the
leasing system to work the mines.
Abandonment of a district brought with it a certain
amount of dismantling and salvaging. Mine and mill equip-
ment (hoist engines, pumps, stamp batteries, concentrating
tables) was often removed and sold for scrap or moved to
other districts. Merchants and proprietors packed up their
goods, and sometimes their buildings. What was left behind
can still tell stories--the mine and mill sites tell of the
efforts men were willing to make to wrest gold and silver
from the earth; the town and camp sites still tell of the
lives of those who worked the mines.
44
Mining: The Technology
Mining technology in the latter half of the 19th century
and the first part of the 20th century is represented by a
varied and seemingly chaotic collection of equipment and
structures that lie scattered throughout the west, abandoned,
unused and uncared for. Often these remains baffle those who
must deal with these resources. One danger to such resources
is the failure of government and the public to understand
them, or to consider them as evidence of a system of inter-
related activities. Failure to understand the basic charac-
teristics of this system, particularly when related sites are
separated from one another by miles, can lead to resource
planning that misconstrues the resource, or at worst, to a
poorly-conceived mitigation plan.
Lode, or hardrock, mining, historically the most common
type of mining in central Nevada, consisted of four activi-
ties: 1) exploration and development; 2) excavation and
removal; 3) transportation; and h) reduction. As we have
already pointed out, the process of searching for an ore
deposit was haphazard at best, especially in the 19th
century. Once a promising outcrop had been discovered, and
a claim staked, one or more adits or shafts were dug in an
effort to determine the size, extent, and richness of the
deposit at depth. Claims staked in areas adjacent to a
promising outcrop needed to be explored in a similar fashion.
In the early days of a district much of this exploration
work was carried out by hand: rock was broken by picks and
sledges and hauled away in wheel barrows or buckets. A
mine's first shaft, probably dug by its discoverers, con-
sisted of a hole in the ground with little or no bracing.
Access up and down the shaft was by ladder; ore and waste
rock were hoisted out by a windlass. As the shaft was sunk
deeper, bracing was added as required and the windlass was
replaced by a whim: a large drum, turned by a mule or horse,
around which the hoisting cable was wound. Use of blasting
powder, and later dynamite, significantly improved the rate
at which tunnels and shafts could be driven. However, until
the widespread introduction of compressed air drills in the
late 1880*s and early 1890's, holes for the explosives had
to be laboriously drilled with star drills and sledges.
As the search for ore extended further out from the
shaft or main tunnel and as the workings got deeper, it
often became necessary to make improvements to the mine so
that the exploration and mining of ore could proceed
smoothly. This development work could consist of nearly
anything: widening or straightening of tunnels for more
efficient waste and ore hauling, retimbering temporary
exploration tunnels, sinking a new and bigger shaft, or
installing pumps.
45
The techniques of raining and removing ore differed
little from those of driving an exploration tunnel in barren
rock. Ore or waste rock was broken up by blasting, loaded
by hand into cars, and taken out of the mine either up the
vent shaft or out the main tunnel. Removal of ore involved
a great deal of skill, because the goal was to remove as much
of the ore as possible without the roof caving in. In
narrow vein deposits, particularly those with steep inclines,
virtually all the ore could be removed and the walls braced
with wood posts. With larger orebodies or veins in unstable
ground, sophisticated systems of timber bracing were adopted
to prevent cave-ins. The most common system, still used
today, is called square-setting. Square-sets consist of a
series of interlocking open-sided cubes constructed of mas-
sive timbers 10-15" square and 8-12' long. Often old stopes
(the "holes" from which ore was removed) were also filled
with waste rock as a means of preventing cave-ins that could
disrupt the operations elsewhere underground. (Filling old
stopes with waste rock was also more efficient than hauling
the rock to the surface.)
The larger the mine became the more complex and orga-
nized it was. Miners could be at work on several orebodies
at once, each miner breaking approximately one ton of ore per
day. Once broken, ore was loaded into cars and taken to the
main shaft or tunnel and out of the mine. Waste rock was
removed in the same manner. At the same time timber,
blasting materials and other supplies were being brought
into the mine for use. Much of the activity of a mine
revolved around the shifts. Blasting, for example, was done
between shifts when few if any men would be in the mine.
Waste rock and ore were taken to the surface at different
periods during a shift, or by different routes, in order to
simplify materials handling at the surface. For every man
working underground, most mines had a least one man on the
surface .
As the mine grew deeper the problems of temperature,
water and ventilation increased. Pumping was the most common
solution to the problem of water. The type of pump used
depended on the depth of the mine. Often a piston pump at
the bottom of a shaft or a series of pumps at various points
down a shaft were used, powered by a steam engine (a Cornish
pump) at the surface. Hydraulic pumps wei e also used if a
sufficient supply of water with a good head could be found.
Pumping of any kind was expensive however, and mine operators
often tried to drive tunnels under the workings of their
mines and let the water drain through these tunnels. In
Austin a number of tunnels were dug during the first five
years, and an 1882 map of Eureka shows seven drainage
tunnels. While tunnels were a possibly cheaper and
46
technologically simpler solution to draining mine workings,
and were commonly employed in new districts, they seldom
met their builders' expectations once the mines of a district
reached depths of more than 500 to 1000 feet.
The Union Pacific Tunnel Company, for example, was
incorporated in March, 1871 to construct an exploration and
drainage tunnel into Lander Hill in the Reese River district.
Work on the tunnel ceased after 300 feet due to lack of
funds, and the company was subsequently purchased by the
Manhattan Company. This tunnel was never finished because
it was felt that there was not enough water in the mines to
justify such a long tunnel, especially when the majority of
the workings would have been below the level of the tunnel.
Interestingly, resumption of work in this tunnel in 1891 was
seen as the key to reviving the mines of the Austin area.
In most mines, those that were not very deep, problems
of ventilation were solved when a second air shaft or tunnel
was connected with the workings and the mine developed its
own drafts. Often these drafts considerably improved the hot
and humid conditions underground. If they did not, ice water
and blocks of ice, as well as blowers, were used to cool and
ventilate the workings .
Surface remains associated with an underground mine
will vary considerably depending on the age of the mine, size,
and extent to which the site has been vandalized and scavenged
The most visible and permanent feature will be the tailings
piles surrounding the tunnel(s) and shafts (s) of the mine.
These piles consist of waste rock that has been removed in
the process of driving tunnels underground to search for ore,
and in the process of excavating and removing that ore.
Often the size of the tailings piles can serve as a rough
indication of the extent of the underground workings --with
the caution that often the more profitable mines used waste
rock to fill in mined-out stopes.
The geology of the orebody(s) will to some extent
determine the location of the major mine entrances. They
will be arranged to minimize the effort required to reach the
ore and to remove the ore and waste rock. For many mines the
main entrances changed as the search for ore went deeper
underground. The workings of mines on ridges or hillsides
most often were reached by near-horizontal tunnels. As the
workings grew deeper the position of the main tunnel moved
further down the hillside so that it always remained close
to the level of the major workings. When it was no longer
feasible and practical to drive tunnels to reach the workings,
one or more vent shafts would be constructed. Those mines
that could not, because of the local topography, use tunnels
47
to reach their workings, resorted to shafts. The position
of these shafts often changed also to minimize the distance
ore had to be hauled to a shaft.
By this stage in the development of a mine, the first
structure on the surface had been erected: a powder house,
essential to protect the explosives used underground from
the weather. This structure could be as simple as a stone-
lined dugout, or as elaborate as a dressed stone building
with an iron door. Because there was always a chance that
the powder (later dynamite) would explode accidentally, the
powder house was usually some distance from other surface
activities .
If exploration and exploitation showed that the mine
had promise, one of the first substantial structures to be
constructed, if required, was a small headframe and a hoist
house with a small, steam-powered hoist. In districts where
the weather was bad, these two structures were often
enclosed as a single building, as much to protect the equip-
ment as the miners. The earliest headframes , of the 1860's
and 1870's, were built of wood. By the mid-1880 's the
technology existed to build cast- and wrought-iron or steel
and wrought iron headframes. As mining remains around
Tonopah testify, steel was the dominant material for head-
frames by 1900. However, it is unlikely that many metal
headframes exist today due to the scrap drives of World War
II. By 1900 corrugated steel over wood or metal frames had
replaced wood and stone as the dominant building material for
nearly all surface structures at a mine site.
Until well into the 20th century steam was the favored
motive power for hoisting works because of the low speed
torque advantages of reciprocating steam engines. Gasoline
or diesel engines became popular in this century for small
operations and electric motors gradually replaced steam for
large hoisting works.
If the mine was wet, one or more pumps could be found
near the opening of a shaft. The most common type of pump
during the 19th century was the Cornish beam engine. This
pump, driven by a steam engine, consisted of a large walking
beam pivoted at the center. One end of the beam was con-
nected, via a crank, to a flywheel, while the other end
was connected to a pump rod or beam that went down the shaft.
As the flywheel rotated, the walking beam rocked back and
forth, moving the pump rod up and down. At various points
down the shaft reciprocating pumps were connected to the rod.
In this century, turbine pumps, driven by gas, diesel or
electric motors gained favor because of lower maintenance
requirements and higher capacities.
48
Introduction of compressed air drills and other com-
pressed air machinery in the 1880's and 1890's required air
compressors at the surface. Compressors were many times
housed along with dynamos for electric lights in a power
house .
A number of other support activities for underground
operations occurred near the main entrance (shaft or tunnel)
of a mine, often in one or more separate buildings. The two
most important were the blacksmith and machine shops and the
carpentry shop. The blacksmith and machine shops' major
functions included sharpening of the drills, repair of ore-
cars, and fabrication of track components for the orecar
railways both underground and on the surface. Men who worked
in the carpentry shop also built and repaired the surface
buildings .
At larger mines there might be a separate mine office
where the superintendant and staff worked and where the
records of the mine were kept. Many mines also had change
houses --buildings where miners changed clothes before and
after a shift. Occasionally, particularly at isolated mines,
there would be a bunk house/boarding house for the men who
worked at the mine. Invariably present were storage areas
for timber and wood for the mine and fuel for the boilers,
as well as track and other spare parts.
In mines where water was a problem, one or more
drainage tunnels were associated with the underground work-
ings, but at some distance from the major entrance. If
ventilation and heat underground was a problem there also
could be one or more ventilation shafts or tunnels at remote
parts of the claim, possibly with blowers driven by steam,
gas or diesel engines or electric motors.
Waste rock and ore were removed from underground mines
in one of two ways. When the access to a mine was via a
tunnel, all material going in and coming out did so on small
cars that ran on rails. Where access was via a shaft, materi-
al in the early years often came out on cars. In many larger
mines one or more shaft compartments were dedicated to ore
and waste rock skips. These skips would be filled with ore
or waste underground, hoisted to the surface, and dumped
into bins connected to the headframe.
Once the waste rock reached the surface (in skips or in
cars) it was taken to the nearest tailings pile and dumped.
The ore's route to the mill depended upon the distance to
the mill. If the mill was close by, ore could be transported
in ore cars, perhaps the same cars which brought it out of
49
the mine. If the mill were further away, ore could be
transported by aerial tram, on wagons or by railway. The
Ruby Hill Railroad in Eureka and the Tonopah-Goldf ield
Railroad both hauled ore between mine and mill.
Within central Nevada five basic types of reduction
methods were used at different times. The Washoe and cyanide
processes began with crushing the ore as finely as possible,
for which huge batteries of stamp mills were used until well
into the 20th century. In the Washoe process, ore dust mixed
with water was then fed into large pans or vats equipped
with mullers (mixing blades). Into the pan were added
mercury, salt, iron filings and a variety of other "notions"
and the mixing blades started. After a period of time the
water was drained from pans and discarded. The gold -silver-
mercury amalgam was sent to a retorting room where it was
heated to separate the mercury from the precious metal. The
mercury was recovered and used again while the gold and
silver was cast as bullion bricks.
The Washoe pan process was a mechanized version of the
patio process used in Central American silver mines. In the
patio process silver ore, salt and mercury were spread on the
ground—normally on a stone-surfaced patio or courtyard--and
oxen were led around the mixture, their hooves crushing and
mixing the ore. The amalgam was recovered and retorted. A ver-
sion of the patio process, the arrastra, substituted a circular
pit containing ore, salt and mercury for the patio floor.
Then large rocks were dragged around the pit by animals
walking outside the pit, to accomplish the crushing and
mixing.
In a cyanide mill crushed ore was mixed with water and
placed in large wood or concrete tanks. These tanks con-
tained a solution of potassium or sodium cyanide, which
chemically removed gold and silver from the crushed ore.
After the cyanide tank had been agitated long enough to
ensure that all the precious metals had been captured, the
liquid was drawn off the tank and saved while the slimes were
discarded. The cyanide solution was then treated so that
the precious metals would precipitate out and could then be
recovered and refined. Often, in an effort to increase the
efficiency of the reduction process, mills would utilize the
Washoe process and follow it with the cyanide process.
The Reese River process also began with crushing the
ore. Pulverized ore was then mixed with salt and roasted in
large furnaces. Once the ore cooled, it was treated by the
Washoe pan process. Because of their high lead content,
ores of the Eureka district and other districts with similar
50
mineralogy could not be practically reduced using amalgama-
tion or the Reese River or cyanide processes, because of the
immense amounts of mercury required. In the nineteenth
century the only alternative was smelting, relying on dif-
ferent melting points and specific gravities to separate
waste rock (slag) from the lead, silver, zinc and gold in
the furnaces of a smelter. Introduction of flotation con-
centration in the 20th century provided a more viable
alternative to smelting lead silver zinc ores, and several
districts enjoyed revivals based on this technology.
Flotation mills are relatively simple in principle. Ore
was crushed to a fine powder in ball or rod mills (these
replaced stamp mills in the early 20th century) . Crushed ore
was then mixed with water and other compounds and fed into
flotation cells. Compressed air was bubbled through the
cells, bringing the lead and zinc minerals to the surface
where they were skimmed off, dried and sent to a smelter.
Where significant amounts of silver were also present in the
ore, slimes from the flotation cells were sent through a
cyanide tank to recover the silver.
The location of mills depended to some extent on the
reduction method used. Those mills using the Washoe pan
process, Reese River process, cyanide process or flotation
concentration required large quantities of water. Mills
employing these methods were very often located near rivers,
these being- the most convenient water source. In cases where
the mines were extremely wet, mills were located to take
advantage of water pumped from the workings. As a last
resort mill operators could pipe water in from collection
dams on streams or from well fields, but the expense of
acquiring water this way was always balanced against the
expense of transporting the ore. Whenever possible, any
type of mill would be located on a hillside to use gravity
to move crushed ore through the various stages of milling.
For all of the so-called "wet process" mills, ore began
its journey at the top of the mill where it was received
from the mine and put into an ore bin. From the ore bin, it
was fed to the stamp batteries (later ball or rod mills) and
crushed. The crushed ore was then roasted (Reese River
process) if necessary, before being sent to either Washoe
pans, cyanide tanks, or flotation cells. The' slimes from
any of these processes were then discarded in large tailings
ponds while the mercury amalgam, the cyanide solution or the
floated concentrates were further refined.
The material flow through the smelters of Eureka and
elsewhere in Central Nevada was relatively simple. Ore was
received from the mine and large pieces broken for easier
51
handling. Then it was loaded into the furnaces for smelting.
The furnace was tapped at various points, and the slag drawn
off and discarded in slag piles. The lead/zinc and silver
were drawn off and cast in ingots.
In a few districts in central Nevada, notably Round
Mountain, Manhattan and Battle Mountain, placer mining was
carried out on a large scale. The basic operation in placer
mining was the recovery of free gold from river and stream
gravels. The most common recovery method was washing the
gold-bearing gravels and allowing the heavier gold to settle
out, while the rest of the gravel and sand was washed away.
Numerous dry washing techniques could also be used. Placer
deposits are formed when running water erodes the rock sur-
rounding a vein of native gold (the lode) . Flecks and peb-
bles of the gold are loosened by the water, and are carried
along by the current. These relatively heavy bits of gold
settle out of the water whenever the current slows. Even-
tually, the gold is deposited along with the stream's other
dropped rock debris, in gravel beds along the stream channel.
Most central Nevada gold was in the form of sulfides or other
complex minerals; erosion of these does not produce placer
deposits because the gold minerals are not particularly
heavy. Placer gold is found in a number of situations. It
may be found in old terraces left on the sides of a water
course by subsequent erosion, in buried placers overlain by
barren gravels in an alluvial fan, or in the gravels of
existing water courses.
Elevated river terrace placers occur in both the Round
Mountain and Battle Mountain districts. The most common
method of working these deposits was hydraulicking, using a
high-pressure stream of water to wash gravels into a sluice
box to catch the gold. In some parts of both districts the
amount of barren gravel was too great when compared with the
paying gravel. In these cases paying gravel was mined by
driving tunnels and shafts into the surrounding gravel.
Gravel was removed from these drift placer mines and washed
in the same way that any other placers were worked. The
advantage of drift placer mines was the ability to work only
in the richest portions of the placer deposit.
In the Manhattan and Battle Mountain districts, some
alluvial placers were worked by dredging, which involved
floating a dredge in a pond.
A gold dredge consists of a floating hull with
a super-structure, a digging ladder, endless
chain of digging buckets, screening apparatus,
gold-saving devices, pumps and a stacker.
It could be described as a floating mill
52
with the addition of apparatus for excavating and
elevating the ore [gravels] (quoted in Spence 1980:
401) .
The Round Mountain alluvial placers were too deeply buried
to be worked by floating dredge. Instead, during the thirty
years following the 1930 's a number of operations worked the
district's alluvial placers by removing barren gravels with
heavy earth-moving equipment and then washing the paying
gravels in the traditional manner.
It is difficult to discuss in any detail what is likely
to remain today of the numerous hardrock and placer opera-
tions in central Nevada. It is well known that a good deal
of salvaging occurred when an operation was closed down,
and World War II scrap drives probably took their toll. In
the last twenty years increased public use of federal and
private lands in the state have brought pot hunters and
vandals as well. Given these factors — and others--it is hard
to say what fragments of the mining past are likely to have
survived within the boundaries of the Battle Mountain
District. Over the past few years BLM personnel have visited
a number of mining sites in the district and have completed
inventory forms for the sites. Unfortunately, due to the
inadequacies of the site form used and the Bureau personnel's
lack of familiarity with mining technology it is impossible
to tell in any detail what remained at the sites visited.
With these caveats in mind, it is possible to make
some general comments about resources likely to have sur-
vived somewhere within the boundaries of the Battle Mountain
District. Tailings piles around hardrock mines, tailings
ponds and slag heaps near mill sites, and dredge tailings
and pits on the alluvial fans will have survived because
there is no value in them. Often equipment at a mine or
mill was salvaged when it closed, or during scrap drives,
leaving only concrete or stone foundations. In some cases
wooden headframes and trestles to tailings piles will remain,
as might the wood or metal buildings that housed the many
support functions at a mine site. Vandalism will have taken
a heavy toll however. In many cases smelter ruins can be
identified by their tall stone or brick chimneys as well as
the slag piles. In addition to tailings piles, remains of
wet processes might consist of stone or concrete foundations,
wood or concrete tanks (cyanide process; , ore bins, as well
as partial or complete remains of the mill building.
In examining any mining site, it is important to see
the resources present as evidence of the four interrelated
activities necessary for mining:
53
Development
Excavation and Removal
Transportation
Reduction
Each site can be analyzed in terms of the technology brought
to bear on the problems encountered in carrying out these
four fundamental activities.
54
NOTES
General Note:
All unfootnoted production statistics are from Couch
and Carpenter (19^3).
Discovery at Sutter's Mill brought both gold seekers
and publicity to the Far West. But for a number of years
after 1848, national and international attention focused
almost exclusively upon California and the Oregon Country,
where gold fever was combined with an equally fervent lust
for rich farmland. To a still largely agrarian society whose
settlers were just then learning to live on the midwestern
prairie, the dry western plains and mountain regions appeared
inhospitable, even hostile. They were seen as distances to
cross, not as places to live.
Little more than ten years later, when silver and gold
were discovered at the head of Nevada's Gold Canyon and near
Pike's Peak in Colorado, the United States had changed con-
siderably, both demographically and economically. In the
northeast, soil exhaustion drove many rural people to fast-
growing industrial cities. At the same time, immigrants
from Ireland, England and Wales began to arrive in large
numbers, placing a considerable strain on the region's
resources and creating a surplus labor pool. Finally, by
1859. California's gold fields had evolved beyond the
abilities of individual miners to a high degree of
industrialization.
In this context, discovery of precious metals in Nevada
and Colorado sparked the imagination of thousands of frustrated
•24.9 'ers in California, and countless would-be miners in New
England. Riches equal to or greater than those of California
had been found on both edges of the Great Basin--an area of
land many times the size of California. Just the possibility
of finding another Comstock or Pike's Peak was enough to
encourage large numbers of individuals and groups to explore
the "vast wastes". Discoveries in central Nevada, Utah and
Colorado during the early 1860's only confirmed what these
men already guessed, or hoped.
2
Perhaps the major reason capitalists and entrepreneurs
of the early 20th century were wary of investing in new
mining districts was that as a group they were much more
sophisticated than their 19th-century predecessors. These
20th century industrialists and financiers were well aware
of the mining investment frauds of the past century, and
many fully understood, from their own experience, how these
frauds were perpetrated. Thus, they were very suspicious of
investments such as those offered in Tonopah, at least until
the investment opportunity had proved itself.
55
3
^Nineteenth century prospectors, miners and merchants
were an optimistic lot, willing to build towns and mills--
to form a district—almost anywhere on any pretext. We
know of those districts that fell quickly, by their con-
spicuous absence from the historical record; there is no
mention in the census, no city directory, probably no
newspaper. The histories of many of these "dreams that
failed" could be reconstructed, some could not. In any
case, such an effort is beyond the scope of this overview.
56
Argenta
A Mineral Occurrences
ZZ) Mining Districts
Map 7- Central Nevada Mining Districts, Camps and Towns, 1862-1920
57
Landscape and Arrangement of Mining Towns
Physical arrangements of mining communities, whether
camps, towns or "cities" such as Austin and Tonopah, tended
to follow certain patterns. The basic plan—which was not
unique to mining country but rather a continuation of tradi-
tions developed in the east and midwest—began with a central
core of commercial establishments. Beyond this core (which
could be simply one street wide, or include several blocks to
either side) were residences, and beyond these the many mani-
festations of mining: adits, headf rames , mills, shops.
Because location of mining camps was determined simply
by the location of ore, many camps and towns grew up in
awkward geographical circumstances. Most fortunate were
camps set up in broad valleys, such as Round Mountain,
Pioneer and Prospect, where there was plenty of room for
expansion and to lay out wide streets in a traditional mid-
American grid pattern. Many others, however, were wedged
into narrow, steep canyons that produced crowded conditions
even when there were few people. Ophir Canyon, Tybo, and to
a lesser degree, Austin, are examples of this. Tybo, in
particular, was pinched into a narrow space, producing a
long, strung-out community in which stores and houses on
"Main Street" were backed close against the slopes on
either side. In a few cases, two-part towns, or even two
separate towns, developed. Tybo and Hot Creek both had
"upper" and "lower" sections. At Reese River, the cost of
town lots in Clifton was so great that miners and merchants
moved further up Pony Canyon and began the town of Austin
(Browne 1866:27) .
On the other hand, towns built along railroad lines
generally had plenty of room to grow, even if they seldom
did. Appropriately, they were laid out with commercial
main street running parallel to, and hard by, the rail lines.
This orientation obtains today at Battle Mountain, and was
likely the case in ephemeral towns such as Alpha, Ledlie and
Blackburn.
Arrangement of buildings within mining towns and camps
was not necessarily very orderly. This was due partly to
geographical constraints, such as at Tybo, where there simply
was insufficient room for everyone in the narrow canyon.
But it was also in' large measure due to the fact that camps
were set up in a hurry, without benefit of formal laying-out,
so that everyone could move directly to the business of get-
ting rich. The result was often a certain chaos, particu-
larly on the outer edges of a town. While "Main Street"
would generally form a neat path through town, and sometimes
58
have one or two other streets running parallel to or across
it, this pattern soon degenerated into a jumble of houses,
corrals, tents, and dugouts, here and there interspersed with
an occasional mine shaft or headframe. Looming above it all
were the mines, and the large mills that spilled down the
hillsides.
The physical remains of central Nevada's mining commu-
nities tend to give an erroneous impression of the past,
largely because so little is left. Outer limits of camps and
towns are roughly identifiable from the location of adits,
tailing piles and other debris of mining activity, and it is
possible to find "main street" either by the remains of com-
mercial buildings or traces of a principal road. Much of
what was erected between these features is gone, however:
tents moved away, frame buildings dismantled for reassembly
elsewhere or for their materials. First to leave a town
would be those whose livelihood, and therefore housing, was
marginal. Last to leave would be those with a substantial
stake in the community, such as merchants, whose places of
business, and often their houses, would be of more durable
construction. Thus, where anything at all remains of a town,
what is left is frequently from the central core and of stone
or brick: materials much more difficult to remove than can-
vas and wood.
59
Industry: Non-Mining
"Nevada is not in a position to compete effectively in
manufacturing, since it lacks sufficient water to
satisfy certain industries and fuel resources for even
its own heavy industries, while coal is plentiful to
the east and oil to the west. Moreover, labor costs
are high and the state is too far from sources of many
necessary raw materials." (Elliott 1973:3^-5)
This situation of today certainly existed in 19th and early
20th century central Nevada, and was exacerbated by extremely
primitive transportation systems and a probable lack of
interest in manufacturing when riches could come so much more
quickly (theoretically at least) through mining. Thus, cen-
tral Nevada's history includes only a few instances of
industry apart from extraction and processing of ores, and,
of these, many were mining related.
One such industry was manufacture of charcoal, which was
developed to meet the requirements for an efficient fuel for
the smelters and roasting furnaces of the region's mining
districts. Another industry- -also mining related — was salt
production. Salt was collected from desert playas and was
used in both the pan amalgamation and the Reese River
roasting processes (Young & Budy 1979:115)* During the
1870 's and early 1880 's, there were a number of "salt works"
in the region. Williams ' salt marsh, in Diamond Valley north
of Eureka, encompassed 1000 acres of salt flats, and used
large pans in which to evaporate water. With 22 such pans,
the works were able to produce 5000 lb. of salt per day
(Angel 1881:4-36). Other recorded "salt works" included
Spaulding's, in Big Smoky Valley, and Columbus Salt Marsh
near San Antonio (Blume 1977: 11-23).
One more "industry" of interest chiefly as an oddity
rather than an important factor in the region's history, was
a "pebble factory" owned and operated by Omer Maris, who with
his wife Cora came to the Toquima range about 1916. Maris
located a large deposit of chalcedony, and designed a mill
built by the Cambell-Kelly foundry in Tonopah, to convert
chunks of rock into pebbles. Pebbles were used in mills to
grind ore, and had previously coma to the US as ballast in
ships sailing from Scandinavia. Maris' operation lasted
only 3 years, before he moved on to other pursuits. As late
as 1971 t however, there remained, in a valley between
Belmont and Manhattan, the Maris homesite, powder magazine
and mill (Maris 1971) .
60
Like these small industries, charcoal manufacture
depended on availability of the right raw material in
quantity—in this case pinyon and juniper wood from the
region's mountain forests. As noted above, central Nevada
ores required roasting with salt before amalgamation took
place. During the 1860's, reverberatory furnaces were used
at Reese River, fueled with wood from surrounding forests,
the cost of which was nearly 60$ of the total cost of milling
(Young and Budy 1979:115).
In 1869. German engineer C. A. Stetefeldt designed a far
more efficient furnace. First used on a large scale to
reduce "rebellious" ores from Reese River mines, "the
Stetefeldt furnace [also] became the standard roasting
mechanism for the central Great Basin, " until the cyanide
milling process replaced roasting and amalgamation at the
turn of the century (Young and Budy 1979:115). That same
year, G. C. Robbins" small "demonstration" smelter opened the
way to exploitation of the Eureka district's lead-silver
ores. Efficient smelting, however, required temperatures
significantly higher than those needed for roasting. To
achieve proper temperatures, processors of Eureka and other
lead-silver ores turned to charcoal.
The charcoal industry thus developed first in forests
near Eureka in the early 1870 's, (Young and Budy 1979*. 116;
see also Welch 1979, Grazeola 1969, O'Neill 1976). At first,
pinyon and juniper wood was cut, dried, then burned in earth-
covered pits. Utah juniper and curlleaf mountain mahogany
were also burned, but they required higher temperatures than
those obtainable in pits. So the industry turned to kilns,
which could produce the required drafts.
Kilns were beehive-shaped structures, built variously of
stone, adobe, fire brick or any of these in combination.
The height of a kiln was equal to its diameter, which could
range from 16 to 26 feet, and wall thickness ranged from
30" at the base to 12-18" at the top. Each had two large
openings, one at ground level at the front, the other higher
up, at the rear, for stoking, and 2-4 rows of vent holes a
few inches above ground (O'Neill 1976:2).
Most writing on central Nevada's charcoal industry has
concentrated on the Eureka area--for it was indeed a major
producer of the fuel. Charcoal burning has received atten-
tion in studies of Nevada's immigrant populations as well
(Grazeola 1969, Earl 1969, Shepperson 1970), because it was
almost entirely dominated by Italians and immigrants from
that part of Switzerland linguistically and culturally
related to Italy. According to the federal census of 1880,
61
these men (very few had families) accounted for nearly 12$
of Eureka County's population. Census population schedules
for that year show Italian and Swiss charcoal burners in
concentrations throughout the Eureka area, particularly North
Ruby Hill i Fish Creek Wells, the Williams Range, the McGarry
District in the Diamond Range, in and around the Dunderberg
and Hamburg mines, Spring Valley, Secret Canyon and Cedar
Creek. They were also prominent in the railroad town of
Alpha. Ironically, only 3 kilns have been recorded from the
Eureka area, and two of them (1080, 1049) are in poor condi-
tion. The Philipsburg kiln (1079) constructed of stone, has
been reported as intact and is protected by a fence.
Another center of charcoal production, although short-
lived, was located in the Tybo-Hot Creek area, where lead-
silver ores were produced beginning c. 1874. In 1877» the
Tybo Consolidated Co. hired Henry Allen of Eureka to build
no fewer than 15 kilns near Hot Creek (Eureka Sentinel
2 Sept. 1879, quoted in O'Neill 1976:4; Angell 1881:524).
These were of brick, most likely obtained from nearby Belmont
which had a sizable brick industry. There remain today
seven charcoal kilns in "Kiln Canyon" west of Tybo, and
others in Sixmile and Fourmile canyons. Associated with the
kilns in many cases are remains of dwellings, probably once
occupied by charcoal burners, and several sites which may be
associated with Shoshones who lived and worked on the fringes
of the Tybo-Hot Creek communities. As at Eureka, Tybo's
charcoal industry was dominated by Swiss and Italians, who
at day's end took their ease in taverns such as the Coal
Burners' Rest and the William Tell.
Central Nevada's pinyon- juniper woodlands supplied not
only the charcoal industry in Eureka and Tybo, but also pro-
vided materials for building in all parts of the region.
Much of this timber was simply cut, peeled and roughly worked
for use on roofs, for fenceposts, corrals, and door and win-
dow framing. Well-milled lumber was scarce and expensive in
19th century central Nevada, and much of the best, used for
"finishing and particular work" was imported from western
Nevada and California (Nev. Surveyor Gen. 1866:70; 1879-80:29)
Although mining companies probably accounted for most of the
lumbering and milling in the region, sawmills supplying town
markets were not unknown (but not currently listed by BLM-
Battle Mountain). In 1864 there was a steam sawmill at
Washington, and "good quality" lumber (pinyon or digger pine)
was produced at a mill at Silver Creek. The latter mill
moved to Big Smoky Creek in May of that year, and was supple-
mented by a machine to cut shingles that would replace "the
straw and dirt that builders have in great measure been com-
pelled to use" (Reese River Reveille 3 May 1864:1; 7 May
1864:2; 14 May 1864:2) .
62
As local sawmills supplied much-needed building
lumber, the lime industry provided material for masonry
construction, again principally for town consumption.
Probably very small in scale, this industry produced pow-
dered lime from local limestone for use in high quality
mortar. Lime burning, or "calcining" of limestone could be
done over an open fire, but kilns were more often used.
They were constructed of stone or brick, and polygonal in
shape. Many 19th century kilns were lined with firebrick,
creating a "barrel-shaped" interior. Where possible, lime
kilns were built into a hillside, to permit loading from
the top. Burned lime was removed through an opening near
the base, which could be closed to control drafts (McKee
1973:62-63). According to the Reveille (27 June, 1863: 3),
an early instance of lime production was located "about 6
miles south" of Austin and operated by John L. Means. To
date, only one lime kiln has been identified in the study
area, in the Toiyabe Range at the southern end of Crescent
Valley (1^1), and a lime pit has been reported near the
Tybo Charcoal Kilns.
Liquor manufacture in Nevada also required a raw
material, but in this case one supplied by farmers. As
early township survey maps show, barley was an important
crop in the first decades of agriculture in the region.
Much of this barley ended up at local breweries, where it
was converted to ale and whiskey.
All Nevada's larger towns had at least one brewery in
the 19th century. Breweries did a brisk local business, as
census records and city directories of the period show in
their numerous listings for tavern keepers and liquor
dealers. They may also have supplied the region's mining
camps, where the saloon was prominent in the local business
community. Although German immigrants participated in many
aspects of Nevada history, as farmers, ranchers, dry-goods
merchants, grocers, etc., they appear to have dominated the
brewing industry. McKinney (I878) lists 9 breweries in the
region, most with good German names: Bauer and Schonwald
at Austin, Amfahr at Battle Mountain, Bauer at Belmont,
Bremenkopf & Regli, Lautenshlager , Mau and Heitmann at
Eureka, and Leschner, Valentine and Co. at Tybo.
63
Immigrants
The fact that the foreign-born made up a significant
proportion of Nevada's 19th century population has been
recognized by Elliott (1973) and Shepperson (1970). This
strongly international flavor was characteristic of many
western mining camps (Smith 1967; 2*0, but in Nevada the
numbers were astonishing. According to Shepperson (1970:
13-1*0 i foreign-born comprised kk.2% of the state's popula-
tion in 1870, and 41.2% in 1880. This massive immigration
of foreigners to Nevada made it "one of the top ten foreign-
born states in America for more than seventy-five years"
(Shepperson 1970:14).
Although a detailed statistical analysis of population
origins was beyond the scope of this study, even the briefest
perusal of manuscript census returns from central Nevada
reveals the extent to which foreigners participated in develop-
ment of the region. However, association of various immigrant
groups with cultural resources in central Nevada is a more
difficult proposition. In some states, it is possible to
associate such groups with churches or particular geographi-
cal areas of settlement. This is not the case in central
Nevada, however: the absolute number of churches in the
region was always quite small, and each thus served worship-
pers of many nations at once. And excepting the Chinese, who
for the most part were isolated in ghettos, foreign-born
inhabitants moved about the region and within its communities
as freely as did the American born population, lived in the
same kinds of dwellings and used the same material goods as
did Americans. Furthermore, attrition of buildings and
structures, through removal, destruction or deterioration has
in many cases left few physical remains to associate with
anyone, let alone specific groups.
There are a few exceptions, however. As noted previ-
ously, the principal non-mining industrial activity in
central Nevada was charcoal manufacture, carried out almost
exclusively by Swiss and Italians. A number of charcoal
kilns remain; the greatest number are in the Tybo-Hot Creek
area, but investigation in the canyons and valleys around
Eureka may locate more. The Tybo area also contains dwellings
that may also be associated with the charcoal burners.
Immigrants who participated in the agricultural, rather
than the mining, economy can in a number of instances be clearly
associated with cultural resources. Many early ranches are
still extant, and through them it may be possible to recog-
nize the role of German, Irish, Italian and Basque immigrants
in the settlement and subsequent development of central
Nevada's agricultural community.
64
Racism prevalent in the 19th and early 20th centuries
effectively relegated the Chinese population (as well as
native Shoshone and Paiute inhabitants) to a status well
"below that of the larger, relatively fluid, Euro-American
society of camps and towns. Chinese labor, however, was
instrumental in construction of the Central Pacific Railroad,
which first brought these immigrants to central Nevada
(Lingenf elter , 1970:115) • Upon completion of the railroad,
the Chinese were discharged and left to fend for themselves.
Battle Mountain, on the Central Pacific line, had a Chinese
community by 1870 (1870 Federal Census, Lander Co.). The
1880 census found Chinese in both Lander and Eureka Counties,
and not necessarily working on railroads, although the camps
of Evans, Diamond and Alpha (on the Eureka-Palisade line) as
well as Cortez, Austin and Eureka, contained groups of
Chinese laborers. Chinese also worked as miners, although
their employment as such was extremely unpopular in the
Euro-American mining community and with local businessmen.
Apart from racism, the principal issue with these groups
was the low wages paid to Chinese miners. Caucasian miners
resented being displaced by "cheap labor," and businessmen
feared that low wages, and disinclination of the Chinese to
spend lavishly, would mean less money flowing into and
through the local commercial sector (Lingenfelter 1970:108).
However, in 1880 Chinese miners could be found in significant
numbers in Galena Canyon, Lewis and around Argenta. It is
interesting to note that in Argenta the large contingent of
railroad laborers was wholly Caucasian, including Americans ,
Irish and Germans.
Anti-Chinese feelings sometimes led to formation of
clubs dedicated to driving the immigrants out — out of town
if possible, and certainly out of jobs coveted by whites.
Such a group was organized in Eureka in 1876, and another
at Tybo in the same year. The Workingmen's Protective Union
rose in response to the Tybo Consolidated Company's impor-
tation of Chinese from Eureka to work in local mines. No
sooner had the Chinese arrived than the Protective Union
began armed threats. Tybo Consolidated quickly backed down,
and the Chinese went back to Eureka in wagons thoughtfully
provided by the Union (Lingenfelter 197 / +:123) • Nonetheless,
according to the 1880 census, Tybo did retain a small
community of Chinese laborers.
Because the Chinese, partly by preference and certainly
by force, lived together apart from the surrounding Euro-
American society, it may be possible to locate structures or
archaeological remains associated with their lives in central
Nevada camps and towns. Such a site (516) has been identi-
fied at Old Cortez; perhaps others may be discovered at some
of the places mentioned above.
65
Apart from the Chinese, most immigrants to central
Nevada appear to have suffered only slight ethnic discrimi-
nation, although organizations such as the Ku Klux Klan and
the American Labor Union campaigned periodically against the
dominance of the foreign-born in so many of the mining towns
and camps (Shepperson 1980:124). The "Charcoal Burners' War"
of 1879, a series of incidents in and around Eureka culmi-
nating in the death of 5 Italians at Fish Creek, was the
result of an attempt by charcoal burners to obtain higher
prices for their product, and only incidentally an effort to
put down a particular ethnic group (Earle 1969. Shepperson
1970, Grazeola 1969). In general there were simply too many
opportunities, too many tasks to accomplish, for Americans
to object too strenuously to the participation of foreigners
in the life and economy of the region.
As on many of the West's hardrock mining frontiers, the
Cornish and Welsh, highly skilled men from a long tradition
of underground mining, were prominent in central Nevada's
mining industry. Irish were well-represented, particularly
in the mines and in railroad gangs, but they also ran
saloons, farmed, and operated stage stations, and otherwise
participated in the region's economic life. Many Germans
became successful ranchers or merchants, for example Reinhold
Sadler, who owned a general merchandise emporium on Eureka's
Main Street and a ranch in Diamond Valley (2150), and later
became Governor of Nevada. Another German immigrant who did
well was George Ernst, who had large livestock holdings in
Hot Creek and Monitor Valley (2189), was County Surveyor
1872-76, was elected County Auditor and Recorder for I878-8O,
and went to the Nevada Legislature in 1880. Scandinavians
also came to central Nevada; around Eureka in particular,
they and Canadians numbered significantly in the lumbering or
"woodcutting" industry.
"Here were congregated the most varied elements of
humanity and the most various types of human character:
persons belonging to almost every nationality and every
status of life-- the Irishman, the Englishman, the
German, the Italian, the Frenchman, the Russian, the
fair-haired Scandinavian, men from every State in the
Union . . . all blended into one homogeneous equality"
(Leadville Daily Chronicle, 19 June 1879).
The reporter was describing a Sunday gathering in Leadville,
Colorado, but it could have been written for almost any 19th
century western mining town on any day of the week. Such a
society, in central Nevada or elsewhere, was not, however,
homogeneous, which made it all the more interesting. On the
other hand, there was a rough equality, particularly in the
66
early days, as people from many nations applied themselves
to making their fortunes in a turbulent, transient and
everchanging society.
67
Commerce
Commercial development in central Nevada was closely-
tied to, and indeed almost totally dependent on, success or
failure of the region's mines. Successful business depended
upon a substantial market, which was only to be found at
significant concentrations of people. Thus few businessmen
remained in an area once mines and their attendant camps
closed, despite farmers' and ranchers' continual need to
purchase goods and equipment.
The kind and number of business establishments depended
largely on the longevity of the community. Often the
general store was first to arrive and last to leave. "This
nineteenth century department store carried a variety of
goods, including dry goods, groceries, clothing, medicine,
hardware, notions, liquors, agricultural implements and
mining equipment, all crammed into one or two rooms. . . .
The activity of this emporium was not limited to consumer
business. Often the miner could sell his gold or silver
bullion, and the farmer could find a market for his produce.
As a profitable sideline, the store might also serve as the
local bank and post office" (Smith 1967:101).
Equally ubiquitous were hotels and livery stables. In
a region characterized by the extreme transiency of much of
its population, hotels played an obvious role. Livery
stables, in that era of the horse and mule, were the region's
19th and early 20th century version of the later gas and
service station, and served the same function: to provide
fuel for and repair (or rest) of the principal means of
transport. Most numerous were taverns and saloons, which
not only provided recreation, but acted as important centers
for the gathering and exchange of news and information, the
source of rumor and site of many business transactions.
As camps grew into towns, businessmen came to specialize
more, and the variety of their enterprises increased. In
1878, for example, the camp of Ellsworth in Nye County had
directory listings for an assayer, two mill agents, two
general merchants and an hotelier (who likely provided livery
services as well). Battle Mountain that same year boasted a
meat market, bakery, restaurant, blacksmith and wagon maker,
lumber dealer, boot and harness maker and even a hairdresser,
as well as a hotel and several saloons and general stores
(McKenney 1878:176,183). Seldom included in directories, but
often present in camps and towns were laundries, most
operated by Chinese (Smith 1967:103)- Many towns included at
least one attorney, who handled the litigation inevitably
arising from conflicting mining claims and questionable
68
deals; and the largest population centers invariably
attracted a physician or two (Ross, c. 1957).
A town may have felt some reason to boast when an
agent of the prestigious Wells, Fargo and Co. of San
Francisco opened for business on Main Street. Although
Wells, Fargo established only one bank in the study area
(Austin in 1869) i its agents could be found in several towns,
among them Battle Mountain, Belmont, Jefferson, Tybo and
Grantsville (Wells, Fargo & Co. Directories 1871, 1879.
1881). Agents were as a rule men, but there is at least one
recorded instance of a woman agent, Miss 0. M. Crockett of
Austin in 189^ (Wells, Fargo & Co. Directory, 189*0.
Wells, Fargo agents substituted for actual banks in
camps too small or unstable to interest other bankers.
Larger towns, however, drew other banking interests. An
early institution was Paxton and Thornburg (later Paxton and
Curtis) of Virginia City, which opened a branch office in
Austin in 1863 (Shields, research notes). By 1880, Paxton
and Co. had expanded to Eureka and Belmont (McKenney 1881).
The Eureka branch was later (1885) reorganized under new
management as the Eureka County Bank (Shields, research
notes) .
Official state records on banking were not established
until 1908. According to the State Bank Examiner's first
report (1908), there were 5 state banks and two private banks
in the study area, including the Eureka County Bank, Bank
of Manhattan, Nye and Ormsby County Bank (operating in
Carson, Tonopah, Reno, Manhattan and Wonder), and the Round
Mountain Banking Corp. and Horton Banking Co. in Battle
Mountain. The first decade of the 20th century was "one
of the most important" in Nevada banking history, as it saw
establishment not only of the post of State Bank Examiner,
but also the Nevada Bankers ' Association and no fewer than
26 banks around the state within the first five years of the
Tonopah boom (Shields 1953:8,9).
Buildings that housed central Nevada's commercial
enterprises were as varied as the businesses themselves and,
to a certain extent, reflected the outlook and condition of
the town or camp as a whole (Smith 1967:101). In a camp's
earliest days, canvas was often used to shelter the first
business establishments: a tent was quickly erected to take
immediate advantage of opportunity, and could be as swiftly
dismantled should the boom prove a bust. One such establish-
ment was "the Annex" at Tonopah in 1905* "a neat place with
six beds curtained off in a tent with board sides" (Spaulding,
30 March 1905)- In the first days of Manhattan, the Tonopah
69
Lumber Company also operated out of a tent (Berg 19^2:103).
The tent, however, did not present an appropriate facade of
substance and prosperity, and was soon fitted with a wooden
false front, or replaced entirely with a more permanent
structure. Some of these "permanent" structures were only
so in a relative sense, as they were moved, like houses,
from place to place as mining fortunes rose and fell. Per-
haps the most famous instance of this phenomenon was Austin's
International Hotel, originally built in Virginia City and
moved to Reese River in 1863» where it played a long and
prosperous role in the community (Bunning 1977: 13) •
If mines in an area proved (or at least appeared) viable,
camp merchants were often the first to reflect this fact in
the construction of their establishments. Out of the initial
jumble of tents would rise an identifiable "main street"
lined with one-story frame buildings, with vertical plank
or board-and-batten sides, and pitched gable roofs hidden
behind more imposing (often bracketted or otherwise adorned)
rectangular facades. If prosperity continued, merchants
turned to stone and brick construction. The importance of
masonry in retarding fires was well known, although total
protection was impossible. Masonry construction, particularly
brick (which had to be manufactured and thus was fairly
expensive) was also to no small degree a matter of commercial
prestige.
Commercial architecture in central Nevada was conserva-
tive, expressing prevailing popular traditions. Except for
the odd mine shaft and tent, mining town main streets
resembled main streets throughout small-town America, parti-
cularly towns of the trans -Mississippi west. The most
flamboyant structures were found in the big towns of Eureka,
Austin and Tonopah, where there was time, money, business and
competition enough to warrant lavish expenditure. Elsewhere,
the simple storefront, with touches of decoration at the
cornice, was generally the rule.
The most numerous and best-preserved examples of com-
mercial building in the study area are found in Eureka,
Austin and Tonopah, which of the many towns that once dotted
the region are the only ones (along with Battle Mountain) to
have survived as reasonably viable communities. In abandoned
(or nearly abandoned) towns, natural deterioration, scavengers
and vandalism have destroyed many buildings. Identifiable
commercial structures do remain, however, in Berlin, Belmont
and lone. In Manhattan, the Edison Power Co. substation,
built early in the 20th century in a vaguely Mission style,
still survives. Another building in Manhattan, constructed
of rock-faced stone, is an excellent example of the turn-of-
the century small town bank: single story, with wide
70
entrance let into a chamfered corner. In Tybo , the Trow-
bridge store, built of brick from Belmont in 1877. displays
a round-arch "arcade" across the front which was certainly
imposing in its day.
71
Transportation
The history of transportation in central Nevada is
characterized by a demand that far outran supply until well
into the 20th century. Transportation systems were required
to move not only people but large quantities of ore,
machinery and equipment, dry goods and food over great
distances and difficult terrain, and without benefit, for
the most- part, of good roads. Few silver strikes were made
adjacent to well-marked roads (Reese River being the notable
exception); instead, roads were forcibly imposed upon the
landscape in the wake of the prospectors. Lack of proper
roads, however, did not deter people from going where they
would: early township survey maps are crisscrossed with
trails, many of them clearly going someplace, others dis-
appearing into the foothills or wandering inconclusively
through the valleys.
As noted previously, the earliest roads of central
Nevada ran east-west, moving travellers and communications
through the region. Once William Talcott's discovery in
Pony Canyon brought people to Reese River, however, there
began swift, if informal, development of roads throughout
the area. Although they went in all directions, the trend,
following the topography of the land, was north-south, and
a number of valleys, such as Hot Creek and the Big Smoky,
became major thoroughfares due to their strategic location
near or between centers of mining activity.
The earliest formally established roads, beyond the
Humboldt and Central routes, were toll roads enfranchised
by the territorial legislature, and their location was
simply a function of the greatest need (Maupin 1961:2).
Although counties were theoretically responsible for
designating routes, few had the funds to accomplish this.
Instead, counties left the initiative to private enterprise,
at least until they could exercise their right to purchase
the roads (Angus, n.d.,n.p.).
Early sessions of the legislature devoted considerable
time to granting toll franchises (Angus, n.d.). An early
toll road into the study area was granted to Moses Job and
E. Penrod, ending "at a point where the stage road, known as
the Simpson Route, crosses Reese River, with toll privileges
for 20 years" (Laws of Nev. 1 Sess. 1861:36). Another
example was Thomas Luther's 1864 road from a quartz mill in
Upper Austin along a route "deem[ed] most practicable" to
Geneva in Big Smoky Valley (Laws 1864:?) •
72
In the early years of the region's development, these
toll franchises were no doubt quite lucrative, as the roads
were heavily used not only by travellers but by freighters,
whose large teams and wagons would mean substantial fees
(Angus, n.d.). But soon freighting and stage companies
developed their own routes, as there was much competition
among them to establish the "shortest," or at least a less
arduous, way from one place to another and thereby increase
their business.
Stage and freight lines were crucial to development of
the region. They carried passengers and mail, and they
brought from vast distances—California, Salt Lake, Virginia
City--food and material goods of daily life, as well as
every conceivable tool, item of equipment or piece of
machinery needed at the widely-scattered mines. Construction
of railroads did little to hamper business, as the two major
lines, the Nevada Central and Eureka-Falisade, extended south
from the Central Pacific only as far as Austin and Eureka.
Instead, freighting played an important role in central
Nevada until well into the 20th century. The continuing
primitive state of the region's transportation systems (in
contrast to the sophistication of its mining technology) was
witnessed by Episcopalian churchman F. S. Spaulding, who in
1905 on the road between San Antonio and Austin saw a nine-
pair team of horses hauling a gasoline engine and hoist
(Spaulding, 6 April 1905).
To understand the importance of the freighter in central
Nevada's development, a single example is illustrative. In
February, 1909* Walter G. Francis opened a partnership "in
the teaming business" with G. H. Givens in Austin. Francis'
business record for that year reveals an astonishing variety
of jobs. He hired out to the county, to Austin Consolidated,
to local individuals; he rented saddle horses, buggy and
hearse teams, and whim horses. Among his cargoes were coal,
hay, furniture, "cows," Wells Fargo packages, dirt, manure
and lumber (Francis 1909,
In order to operate effectively over the long, isolated
distances between mining camps, freight and stage companies,
particularly in the early years, developed and maintained
their own routes and furnished them at intervals with sta-
tions, as had the Pony Express and Overland ventures before
them. Later stations might develop at existing ranches, or
be established on the initiative of individuals along the
routes. In July 1863i G. W. Jacobs organized a stage line
from Austin to "the Humboldt mines." His men were set to
work constructing roads, bridges and stations, the latter
well-provisioned for "men engaged on the route" (Reese
73
River Reveille , 1 July 63 s 3) • From Eureka, W. L. Pritchard's
Fast Freight developed service to Fioche in 1871. with
stations along the 120-mile route (Eureka Sentinel 13 March 1871:3).
Pritchard also operated through Hot Creek ( Sentinel 14 Jan. 1871:3)
but little evidence of his station remains on the ranch still
known as "Pritchard's Station" (315).
Other stations along the 1870's Eureka-Tybo route
included Summit (2195) » east of Park Range, Hicks' (1013) in
the valley between the Park and Upper Hot Creek Ranges, and
Moore's (316) below Pritchard's. At least one station on the
Tybo-Belmont route has been identified in the Monitor Range.
Appropriately known as McCann's Station (2172), it was
operated in the 1870's by Barney McCann and his wife, Grace,
both immigrants from Ireland. An early station on the
Austin-Belmont road in the 1860's and 1870's was Elijah
Smith's, also known as Stone House (2184). Other Monitor
Valley stations included Thomas Morgan's (1044), and Pine
Creek (2189). Further west were Cloverdale (352), which may
date back to the establishment of a "free road" from Belmont
to West Gate in I867 (Nevada Surveyor General, I867-68:
139-40), and Baxter Spring (363)- Some of these stations
operated for many years, and were augmented by new ones as
population movements required: for example, Spanish Spring
(364) was developed in 1905 as a stage stop on a road between
Manhattan and the new boom town at Tonopah (Blume 1977 •• 11-39) •
Stage and freight stations were basically simple
affairs, although they might develop into sizable ranches
with the passing years. The simplest consisted of a small
dwelling, built of the most easily available materials, with
an attached stable and corral. Log, adobe, and uncut stone
were common construction materials, used informally and with
strict attention to the utilitarian (Lass 1972:104).
Stations served as rest stops for teams, drivers and stage
passengers, and often all slept in the stable (Lass 1972:105).
A stage or freight station was often a family enterprise.
The census enumerator in 1880 counted at Moore's Station (316)
in Hot Creek valley five men: agent William Moore, his
brothers S. C. (a driver) and Walter (a mail carrier), a cook,
and another stage driver. Further north, however, C. W.
Hicks ' station, which was also a ranching operation, included
his wife and daughter. Families were also recorded at
McCann's, Morgan's, and Smith's stations in 1870 (1870
Federal Census, Nye Co.; Tybo Sun 3 Nov. 1877:3).
Some stations, due to location and amount of traffic,
could be quite extensive affairs. One of the best known is
San Antonio in Big Smoky Valley near Peavine Creek. At this
station, which served travellers en route to Belmont, Death
Valley, Silver Peak and Gold Mountain, a two-story, L-plan
74
c
CO
o
00
C
•H
c
o
C
c
P
• H
•H
sz
O
no
o
03
u
-p
o
•H
c
SZ
•H
—
C
ft
cd
C
c
■P
c
•H
o
-p
CO
O
00
c
■p
o
cd
cd
o
i-i
c
no
c
cd
X!
•H
o
00
•H
cr
.p
•H
ft
o
c
no
cd
■p
o
cd
-P
p
jr.
•H
P
00
+3
00
•H
•H
c
cc
00
£
C
ttO
cd
o
o
P
CO
cd
a
cd
-P
rH
•H
o
C
a
CC
cd
p
X
C
cd
-
-p
CD
-*
-p
CD
cd
a
Sh
•H
CD
•H
CO
c
cc
■H
00
cd
-p
T3
00
CD
CD
00
iH
-p
00
ft
c
rH
J2
»
cd
OQ
SZ
cr
00
rH
rH
CD
no
00
00
o
cd
cd
c
cc
p
CO
no
cd
CO
o
rH
CO
cd
£
+3
TJ
o
3
-p
oa
-
3
c
-
SZ
"
O
-
w
c
CO
u
c
5h
5
CO
0)
-
no
o
cd
en
a
CD
u
,c
c
•H
CD
<
CD
CD
•H
-P
r-i
CD
•H
u
no
^
p>
u
cd
CD
p
CD
cd
c
P
>
c
c
P
r-\
-P
cd
5h
s*
a
• H
o
CD
C
•H
3
o
cd
X
C
O
o
•H
O
•H
cd
5-i
cd
o
•H
Sh
o
rH
■H
s
rH
o
ft
cd
cd
r-{
■p
s
ft
S
Eh
O
G
s
x
Oh
s
O
Oh
00
pa
s
00
03
00
O
00
riwr\j->r\\ONco
ON O iH W n 4- >T| vO O-00 ON O
c\i c^c^<^c r ^<^c Y ^<r > \C' n \c r \(" t> \-3-
^^
o
•rH
c
X
JJ>
o
c
o
cd
•H
c
o
c
o
p
p
o
•H
c
o
m
00
cd
•H
-P
o
•rH
c
A
C
no
■p
p
cd
•H
r»
-J
o
CD
a
O
:
c
c
:
CO
00
cd
C
c
sz
j-j
p
cd
•rH
CO
c
•H
C
o
•H
c
no
p
O
o
o
00
cd
•H
_j
P
3
cd
-P
o
•H
S-i
O
c
.*
00
•H
•H
C
p
P
00
cd
O
cc
cd
•H
P 1
SZ
ft
• H
X
•H
CD
-P
-P
cd
r*
:o
cd
p
|r-|
p
P
cd
o
00
P
o
u
CD
rH
cd
cd
cc
rH
p
.*
00
X
00
cd
p
c
cd
c
ft
u
rH
p
-p
cd
:
00
CD
CD
CD
p
00
cd
p
p
cd
00
o
CD
00
00
Jai
ft
T3
CD
CO
no
CD
c
00
cc
o
00
cc
3
CD
r^
>5
S-.
i—t
<
Si
u
T3
X
rH
CO
c
CO
CD
c
cd
Sm
o
r-i
a
o
CD
c
C
CD
o
3
-p
CO
o
5
rH
o
rH
•H
CD
u
T*
no
o
•H
•H
no
c
SZ
Sh
.o
c
o
O
CO
S-,
<
X
3
CD
JZ
cd
s
Jri
p
cd
cd
ft
CD
.o
c
rH
ft
CD
p
>
o
CD
■p
cd
C
r-\
p
E
rH
.O
a
cd
r-l
>J
c
>
•
•rH
>>
rH
t-
ft
CO
•H
o
cd
00
O
3
O
5-i
•H
Im
■H
O
•P
E
5-i
•rH
■H
cd
Q
Eh
3
CC
00
CC
U
00
3
Q
00
■
s
00
a
00
ca
o
r— 1
CM
<tn
jj.
v>
^o
o-
CO
ON
c
rH
CM
CN
^
u^
vO
£>-
cc
ON
o
r-{
rH
rH
rH
H
rH
r-{
r-i
r-^
rH
CM
Battle Mountain — ,
Pony Express
Map 8 : Pony Express and Stage/Freight Stations, and Proximity to Present Roads and Highways
75
building of brick and adobe was built in 1865i said to con-
tain 20 rooms (Blume 1977:11-23,24). Most stations, however,
were probably relatively small, and structures associated
with their activities, such as barns, stables and corrals,
were in many cases soon integrated into larger ranching
operations.
While freight and stage companies operated throughout
the study area, expanding and redirecting their routes as
movement of the mining population dictated, railroads in
central Nevada were far more limited in their geographic
scope. The first rail line through the region was the
Central Pacific, part of the nation's first transcontinental
route, which was built along the Humboldt in 1869- Opening
of this line was a major boon to the region, because, despite
difficulties over high freight charges, it brought in mining
equipment and machinery more swiftly than could freight
companies, provided a means for shipping out ore, and proved
an important boost to the region's livestock industry during
the 1870 's and 1880 's.
However, the Central Pacific ran far to the north of
most mining centers in the region, and additional service
was clearly required. Two narrow gauge lines were developed
off the Central Pacific, the Nevada Central from Battle
Mountain to Ledlie (connecting with the Austin City line into
that town) in 1880, and the Eureka-Palisade in 1875- These
were supplemented wi.th shorter lines, the Austin City (or
Mules' Relief), and the Eureka-Ruby Hill (1875). These
railroads, however, were developed largely to serve major
mining centers already in existence, and thus contributed
little to development of new regions. Indeed, the Battle
Mountain-Lewis (1881) operated little less than one year, and
was discontinued once the mines at Lewis were closed (King
1954:74; see also Myrick 1962).
Lack of railroad service was a hardship recognized early
on in the development of the region, particularly Nye County.
Indeed, the southern portion of the study area lacked a
railroad until the Tonopah mining boom occasioned the con-
struction of several, such as the Tonopah (1904) and the
Tonopah-Goldfield (1905) (Elliott 1966:23-24). As early as
I865, the Nye County assessor noted that "The most serious
obstacle to the cheap production of the precious metals in
this section ... is found in the high prices required to
be paid for the transportation of freights . . . [thus]
exhibiting the supreme importance of railroad connections
between this section and our principal points of supply"
(Nevada Surveyor General, 1865s 66). Over twenty years later,
the situation was no better:
76
In relation to the railroads as a means of cheap
transportation, we have not a mile of track in our
county; in fact we are completely isolated from the
outside world. . . . All our articles of import or
export have to be hauled by teams, at a heavy expense,
over 100 miles to the nearest point of railroad commu-
nication, to wit: Eureka, Ledlie or Sodaville
(Nevada Surveyor General, 1887-8:109).
This plaintive comment underscores both the limited partici-
pation of railroads in the region's development, particularly
in Nye county, and the continued importance of the freighting
companies. Indeed, by the turn of the century, the Nevada
Central Railroad had grown so inefficient that the line's
contract to carry mail from Battle Mountain to Austin was
cancelled and awarded instead to "an ox teamster to ensure
more rapid delivery" (Tonopah Bonanza 23 Jan. 1904:^) .
Little remains to mark the existence of central Nevada's
narrow gauge railroads. Their existence fostered the
development of only one town in the study area of note
(Battle Mountain, which had the advantage of location on the
Central Pacific line as well), although water stations and
flag stops such as Blackburn, Alpha, Watts and Caton's pre-
sumably entertained visions of greatness common to all
railroad towns. Both the Nevada Central and the Eureka-
Palisade were abandoned in 1938. The rails were torn up and
sold for scrap during World War II, and machine shops, round-
houses and other railroad buildings at Battle Mountain,
Austin and Eureka are long gone, although remains of the
station at Eureka still stand and are being used as a barn.
The principal physical legacy of the railroads is miles of
abandoned grade, perhaps a few decaying bridges, and
numerous shacks, dwellings and ranch buildings constructed
with railroad ties.
77
Agriculture
"The western range is largely open and unfenced, with
control of stock by herding; when fenced, relatively
large units are enclosed. It supports with few excep-
tions only native grasses and other forage plants . . .
and can in the main be restored only through control of
grazing. It consists almost exclusively of lands which ,
because of relatively meager precipitation or other
adverse climatic conditions, or rough topography or the
lack of water for irrigation, cannot successfully be
used for any other form of agriculture." (Clawson
1950:1)
Apart from mining, the most important contributor to the
economy of central Nevada has been the range livestock
industry. The land here is, by and large, unsuited to "any
other form of agriculture," but through human perseverance
and determination, it has historically supported significant
numbers of cattle and sheep. "Sagebrush-grass range" offers
"an abundance of grasses and weeds growing around and under
sage"; spacing of trees in the pinyon- juniper range has
allowed the growth of "considerable browse," ideal for spring
grazing. Salt-desert shrub range features shadscale, budsage
and a variety of grasses, and has been considered "fine
winter range" for both sheep and cattle. Southern desert
shrub (or creosote) range (found only in the extreme southern
portion of the study area) provides year-round grazing for
cattle and is used as winter sheep range (Hazeltine 1961:1-8).
Exploitation of these ranges has been characterized by
the need to act within certain unavoidable constraints: lack
of abundant water; severe climate, especially in winter; and
the fact that the central Nevada rangelands are ecologically
quite fragile and will support very few animals per acre.
Achieving a balance between use and conservation of the
region's rangeland has been a recurring problem in the area's
agricultural history, and is still a political and economic
factor today.
Although central Nevada's agricultural landscape has for
many years been characterized by a small number of widely-
spaced ranches and enormous grazing areas, all exclusively
geared to range livestock production and largely independent
of the mining economy, this has not always been the case.
Particularly in the early decades of the region's development,
mining booms created demand for a wide variety of foodstuffs.
These garden crops were produced on farms located near mining
communities that provided a ready and voracious market, since
the alternative was importation of food at great expense from
78
California, Utah, and the valleys of western Nevada
(Reese River Reveille 18 Feb. 1965:2).
Early issues of the Reese River Reveille offer examples
to indicate that farming came to central Nevada hard on the
heels of the miners. On 16 May 1863, the Reveille noted a
"goodly number of ranchers" already located in the Reese
River Valley (p. 2). Subsequent issues announced the first
barley crop (sown by George Wilson, who also grew vegetables)
( Reveille 30 May 1963:3), and "Mr. Mason's" trading post and
store "on the emigrant road" which was to be supplied with
potatoes and other vegetables from Mason's own gardens
( Reveille 3 June 1963:3)- As summer wore on, readers fol-
lowed local agricultural progress: onions, potatoes, cab-
bages, and turnips, and even cucumbers were ripening and
would soon appear in Austin's hotels and stores ( Reveille
15 July 1963:3; 29 Aug. 19630)- Some vegetables no doubt
came from "0 'Neil's ranch, eight miles down from Jacobsville, "
where crops included potatoes, corn, barley, and "a variety
of salads and greens" ( Reveille 23 May 1963:^). More distant
farmers, such as Sabin Nichols and Robinson, Talcott & Co. in
Grass Valley, were yet "near enough" to furnish the Austin
market with peas, onions, lettuce, cabbage and watermelon
( Reveille 16 June 19630; ^ July 19630)-
Production of foodstuffs was not limited to Reese River
country. The Nye County assessor in 1866 noted "excellent
vegetables" growing in Monitor and Big Smoky valleys, includ-
ing nearly 100 tons of potatoes (Nevada Surveyor General
1866:83; Berg 19^2:60). Twenty years later, the list of
valleys "in which farming [wasj conducted to any extent"
included Indian, Peavine, Hot Creek and Antelope valleys.
In 1879-80, the Eureka County assessor reported production of
onions, cabbage, corn, potatoes, carrots, parsnips, tomatoes,
beets and turnips (Nevada Surveyor General 1880:3^-35)-
Animal wants no less than human needs were supplied by
early farmers, who raised hay, barley and oats to feed
thousands of horses and mules brought to the region by the
mining industry, freighting companies and the general
populace. Reese River and Grass Valley produced hay for the
Austin area (Reese River Reveille , 16 May 1863:2; 5 April
186^:2) and Nye county mining communities were similarly
supplied from nearby ranches (Nevada Surveyor General 1866?
63; 1892:112). At first, hay was derived principally from
native grasses that grew in valley meadows; alfalfa was not
raised in quantity until the 1880's (Short 1965:^2).
Because production of garden crops was geared almost
entirely to local markets, this form of agriculture gradually
declined during the 1880's, as the region's first mining boom
79
came to an end (Hardman and Mason 19^9:24). There appears to
have been little attempt to grow vegetables for more distant
markets. This was probably due to lack of sufficient water
to grow these crops on a large scale, and certainly to the
high cost of transportation to markets outside the immediate
area. Instead, many farmers and small ranchers turned to the
range livestock industry, which had been developing in the
region since the early 1860's.
Historians have credited emigrants travelling to
California in the 1850 's with bringing the first livestock
into Nevada (Hardman and Mason 19^9:23; Short 1965:4;
Hazeltine 1961:1-2). At "stations" set up along the Humboldt
and Carson routes, travelers were able to exchange exhausted
animals for others, left behind by earlier emigrants, which
had "recuperated" in nearby valley meadows (Hardman and Mason
19^9:23; Georgetta 1965:28-29). Herds thus built up by set-
tlers along the emigrant routes remained small, however,
because there were no local markets in central Nevada to
encourage greater development (Townley 1976:111).
The 1860's brought significant changes to the region's
fledgling livestock industry. Drought and a severe winter
in California in 1862-63. coupled with discovery of silver
at Reese River and its attendant boom, brought California
ranchers to the Humboldt valley, where prime grasslands
offered excellent winter grazing (Townley 1976:111). Oc-
cupation of rangeland here and in valleys to the north and
south was further encouraged by news in 1866 that the Central
Pacific Railroad would be routed along the Humboldt, thus
providing central Nevada ranchers with a direct shipping line
to California markets (Townley 1976:111). The railroad also
lured Texas cattlemen, who brought longhorns into Nevada
until 1869. when local concern over importation of disease
along with the cattle resulted in state legislation that
ended Texas drives (Townley 1976:113).
Although large-scale ranching, dominated by California
cattlemen, first developed in the Humboldt region, explosion
of mining activity throughout central Nevada created many
new markets for both sheepmen and cattle ranchers. Like
cattle, the first significant numbers of sheep were brought
from California, beginning soon after the Civil War, in
response to a growing demand for mutton in mining camps
(Georgetta 1965:25-26; Connor 1918:135). Soon, however,
sheep, as well as cattle, grazed in many central Nevada
valleys, and ranches could be found "wherever a large enough
stream [came] down from the mountains" (Berg 19^2:57) • In
many cases, individual stockmen owned (or claimed) several
ranches, all in one valley or scattered about several, thus
80
ensuring adequate water and grazing for their growing herds
(Truett Papers) .
Rapid increase in livestock numbers, however, pressed
the region's natural resources to the limit. In the 1870' s,
a period of significant growth in the livestock industry,
overgrazing became a noticeable problem (Hardman and Mason
19^9:23; Sawyer 1971:17; Short 1965:20) as cattlemen vied
with each other and with sheepmen for access to water and
grass. Against sheep, cattlemen were at some disadvantage.
The woolly animals, "following the grass" (Fleming and Brennen
1937**0 i travelled much farther for forage, from spring and
summer grazing in the mountains to desert winter ranges in
the south, which were often far from their home ranches
(Clawson 1950:228-29; Fleming and Brennen 1937,3). Sheep ate
snow, thus allowing more flexibility in the location of their
winter ranges, since for at least that part of the year they
would not be dependent upon springs or streams for water
(Fleming and Brennen 19370)-
It required only a severe winter or two to confirm the
somewhat precarious nature of the region's livestock indus-
try. The first such winter, in 1879-80, produced losses of
up to 50% in much of central Nevada (Short 1965:28), as
depleted rangelands simply failed to provide sufficient
browse to meet livestock needs. In response, ranchers in
the 1880 's began to consider growing alfalfa as a way to
supplement hay supplies heretofore drawn principally from the
natural grasses of valley meadows (Short 1965*^5) • During
the winter of 1889-90, livestock losses ran k0% statewide.
Subsequently, winter feeding, previously the exception,
became much more the rule (Short 1965:66).
The turn of the century was a time of adjustment in the
region's livestock industry. Until then, ranchers had gone
their own ways, dealing with individual problems of food and
water in a spirit of "fair play" (Truett Papers). The
winter of 1889-90 however, pointed out the need for systema-
tic management of the range, rather than simple exploitation
of it (Short 1965:66). Rapid expansion of the sheep indus-
try in these years also provided cattlemen with added incen-
tive to seek some form of range management. For 20 years,
the sheep industry had been dominated by Scandinavian, Irish
and Scots immigrants. In the 1890's their numbers were
noticeably increased by the Basques, many driven out of
California by drought, joining countrymen who had come early
to Nevada from Oregon (Short 1965:77; Barrenchea 1961:1).
These newly-arrived Basques contributed in a major way to
growth of the sheep industry, which reached a peak statewide
by 1910 (Hardman and Mason, 19^9:23). Although they concen-
trated for the most part in northern and northeastern Nevada,
81
Basques soon could be found on ranches scattered throughout
the study area, particularly in the north and central moun-
tain sections. Some established ranches in hitherto
unexploited locations, but others simply acquired existing
operations, converted them if necessary to sheep raising,
and made other improvements as needed. Two examples are
Moore's and Pritchard's stations in Hot Creek valley, which
in the early decades of the 20th century were home to
Baptiste Sorhouet and Phillipe Egoscue, respectively.
Pressure of sheep against the dominant, but struggling,
cattle industry led to attempts to control the former
through grazing laws, and sheepmen were required to obtain
livestock certificates from county officials in the course
of moving their herds through the seasonal grazing cycle
(Truett Papers; Creel 1964:11; Nye Co. Records: Livestock
Certificates 1916-1918). Additional regulation came with
establishment in 1906-07 of several National Forests in the
region, in which livestock (generally sheep, which foraged
in mountainous areas where cattle could not) could graze only
for a fee (Creel 1964:12).
Cattlemen also faced competition from another quarter,
one less amenable to regulation. Toward the end of the 19th
century, valleys of the Great Basin became a sort of las.t
refuge for thousands of wild horses, descendants of stray
stock from the region's mining camps and ranches. To cattle-
men, mustangs were useless as work animals, and their numbers
and foraging patterns depleted available rangeland as
severely as did sheep (Thomas 1979:36; Wyman 1945:97; Hardy,
in Venstrom and Mason 1944:610). The increase in mustang
herds, due to depressed prices for horses that obtained from
the 1870' s until well into the 1890' s (Thomas 1979: 38)
evoked sufficient outcry to pass legislation in 1897 permit-
ting the destruction of "unbranded, wild" horses (Venstrom and
Mason 1944:40). Within a few years, over 15,000 horses were
shot, but hunters' enthusiasm for almost anything equine,
regardless of ownership status, led to the law's repeal
(Wyman 1945:139) .
International events, beginning with the Spanish-
American and Boer wars, created a strong market for horses,
wild or otherwise, and mustangers became frequent visitors
to central Nevada's valleys. Despite their efforts, nearly
100,000 mustangs could be found in the region as late as
1910 (Wyman 1945:121, 138) . World War I provided another
enormous market for horses, and ranchers and mustangers alike
vigorously supplied the demand (Wyman 1945:142; Thomas 1979 '
39). War's end, however, brought the inevitable decline in
prices, and remaining horse herds grew once again. Their
82
numbers, coupled with continuing lack of federal regulation
over grazing of cattle and sheep on public land, led to
serious--and in some areas of the west, still evident--
depletion of existing rangelands (Thomas 1979*39) • Finally,
Congress passed the Taylor Grazing Act in 193^. which among
other things provided for direct government participation
in wild horse control. These efforts were assisted by
development of the dog and cat food industry after World War
II, which created a long-term market for horse meat.
Although individual wild horses were captured by various
means, including creasing, snaring and roping, the most popu-
lar method was to drive horses in bunches into enclosures
(Wyman 19^5 ! 22^). The circular corral or "trap," which was
entered via a "funnel" formed by two wings, was of Spanish
origin (Wyman 19^5 : 216), and its simple and efficient form
endured, whatever the materials employed. The "funnel"
concentrated the running horses into a compact mass headed
straight for the enclosure, and the circular form of the
corral eliminated corners in which the animals might other-
wise have been crushed and injured (Dobie 193^ : 227)- Brushy
hollows and canyons were "usual locations" for horse traps,
but they could also be set up at a water hole or spring, or
on the bank of a creek at a crossing commonly used by wild
horses (Dobie 193^:229; Wyman 19^5:239).
Horsetraps, seldom designed for permanence, were often
constructed of materials readily at hand, such as cottonwood
and juniper posts, brush, whole trees or logs, the whole
often tied together with woven wire. Stone may have also
been used, because there was so much of it available, but
the effort required to pile it up probably made employment
of this material unusual, or practical only in circumstances
in which the corral was intended for other uses as well.
An alternative, developed by mustanger "Fete" Barnum and
first used around WWI in the "wildest parts of Nevada" was
the canvas corral (Wyman 19^5*221, 222). It was easier to
transport than wire, and was far less injurious to horses.
Although built as temporary structures, wild horse traps
are still to be found in the study area. Because the wild
horse problem was, and is, a recurring phenomenon, and
because traps were constructed over the years with a limited
variety of materials, it is not always easy to date them.
Only a few traps have been recorded in the study area. None
of them is of canvas, a material which "revolutionized the
methods" of Nevada horse-catching (Wyman 19^5 s 221), but this
is hardly surprising since a basic feature of the canvas corral
was its portability. However, recorded traps include
examples of log (891), post and cable (850), post and barbed
83
wire (961) and even log and sheet metal (1229) construction.
One, at Rocky Gap Spring (1192), also includes remains of
additional activities associated with horsecatching, such as
sorting or breaking, although the structures are in a very
deteriorated condition. One horse trap (130) has been listed
in the National Register, and cited for its resemblance to a
trap described by Will James . More to the point would be
study of the variety of forms, materials and utilization of
natural features that characterize horsetrap construction and
location, and recognition of these structures as integral
components of the region's agricultural history.
Irrigation, fencing and breeding were other ways in
which central Nevada ranchers of the late 19th and early 20th
centuries attempted to deal with environmental constraints
and competition for both markets and grazing lands. As 19th
century township survey maps clearly show, farmers and
ranchers began irrigating portions of their land at a very
early date. These irrigation systems, which could range from
shallow ditches that carried water diverted from streams by
small brush dams, to "great masonry walls" (Smythe 1905:334).
were probably used often in the early decades to water garden
crops and barley sold in mining camps and towns. Gradually,
however, irrigated lands in the region came to consist large-
ly of native and improved grasslands producing hay or pasture
for cattle, and were also used to control natural sources of
drinking water (Adams 1926:331; Hardman and Mason 1949:26).
Two existing systems may be seen on ranches of some age: the
O'Toole Ranch (1236) in upper Reese River valley, and San
Antonio Ranch (944) in Big Smoky valley.
Barbed-wire fencing, .which came into use in the 1880's
(Crofut 1970:89), served a variety of purposes. In the com-
petition for water and range, barbed wire was erected to
protect pastures, springs and other watering places from
both wild horses and other men's livestock. Fencing of
pastures, however, sometimes cut animals off from water; the
result was an increase in drilling of wells and erection of
tanks and windmills in pastures distant from existing water
supplies (Shannon 1945:206).
Fencing was also a factor in the improvement of breeding
stock: without it, a rancher's fine bull or stallion would
give free service to his neighbor's herd, and his blooded
mares or cows would be subject to unwanted attention from
wild or less valuable visitors (Venstrom and Mason 1944:610).
Although agricultural statistics from 1890 indicate that very
few ranchers in the study area were running blooded stock,
the need for hardy animals that produced the quality and
quantity of meat expected by American consumers led to
serious attempts to improve herds. A notable example was
84
the Lander County Livestock Co., organized in 1905-06 by
George Watt and J. A. Milboy, on Watt's father's Silver
Creek Ranch (2118) in Reese River valley. The company's
emphasis was on improvement of local breeding stock, and to
this end Watt and Milboy used investments from area ranchers
to acquire Herefords from the Reno area- and Cotswold rams
from Utah; among horses, their "principal attention" was
devoted to draft animals (Reese River Reveille , Spec. Supp.
Jan. 1910:80-81).
Although the fragile nature of the environment had begun
to constrain central Nevada's livestock industry barely a
decade after ranchers moved into the region, many more
decades were to pass before a reasonably workable form of
range management was developed. The early decades of the
20th century saw experimentation in several directions, such
as county-issued livestock certificates (generally for sheep)
and establishment of national forests wherein grazing was
federally regulated. One effort at the state level was the
1903 Irrigation Law, which created the Office of State
Engineer, one of whose responsibilities was regulation of the
appropriation of water from the state's rivers, springs and
streams (Report of State Engineer 1903/0*0. A major problem,
however, was the federal government's policy toward public
lands. Historically, that policy had been geared to speedy
distribution of land to individuals, in order to give men of
little wealth an opportunity to pursue Thomas Jefferson's
agrarian dream. Federal land laws were aimed at disposal ,
which succeeded mightily in the prairie and plains states,
but failed in the mountain and desert regions of the far west,
Thus in central Nevada, land ownership was not characterized
by a Jeffersonian profusion of small holdings, but rather by
a small number of ranchers claiming only water and pasture-
lands, leaving marginal ranges (which comprised most of the
region) in the public domain. The result was, of course,
overgrazing, depletion of water sources, and competition--
political, legal and physical—among the region's ranchers
(Clawson 1950:95-96; Adams 1916:32^-325).
The Taylor Grazing Act of 193^ finally confronted the
question of management of public lands. Most important for
the range livestock industry was organization of grazing
districts, mostly below national forests, that included
desert and semi-desert range; and the creation of the Bureau
of Land Management out of the Grazing Service and General
Land Office in 19*4-6 (Clawson 1950:100). Grazing permits con-
trolled the numbers of livestock on public lands, and
seasonal movements of sheep were regulated through establish-
ment of formal "trails" (Sawyer 1971:89). Concern for
maintenance of the range also brought the BLM into the
question of wild horse control, which proved a boon for
85
ranchers but a source of controversy elsewhere (Thomas
1979).
The Taylor Grazing Act and subsequent articulation of
federal land policy provided central Nevada (and the west as
a whole) with a much-needed framework for range conservation
and use. The federal "partnership" with ranchers has not
always run smoothly, due to differing opinions on matters
such as proper rate of stocking, multiple use of public land,
and how much regulation is "enough." Nonetheless, careful
management of the environment has sustained to this day one
of the most important elements in the historical and economic
development of the region.
86
Ranchers and Ranches
A major consequence of discovery of silver at Reese
River was the opening of the entire central Nevada region
to agricultural as well as mineral exploitation. Even as
prospectors scattered throughout the mountains, the broad
valleys and foothills were host to prospectors of a different
sort, seeking water and grasslands on which to establish
farms and ranches. Logically enough, many of the earliest
ranchers located near Reese River; as noted previously, a
"goodly number" were settled in Reese River valley and ready
to cut hay by the spring of I863. At the same time, ranches
were established in Grass Valley northeast of Austin, among
them Dan Callaghan's (2119) (Reese River Reveille 12 Aug.
1863:3). To the west, the brothers Maestretti located sheep
ranches on Smith Creek, by the former Pony Express station
(476) (Truett Papers; King 195^:51), and Peter and Frank
Peterson established ranching and small-scale mining opera-
tions at the north end of Smith Greek Valley (^-73) (Kusunoki
1961:8) .
Situated often in the foothills of the ranges, hard by
streams flowing down from the mountains, or in the wider
canyons, ranches were founded in the 1860's and 1870' s
throughout central Nevada. Lee Vaughn and George Watt
(2118) settled in lower Reese River. Diamond Valley ranches
included the Sadler (2150) and Romano (21^6). H. C.
Fenstermaker (1039.2130) located in Fish Creek Valley, where
in 1879 he developed a fish hatchery in artificial ponds near
his ranch (Nevada Surveyor General 1880:30). Other early
ranches in this eastern portion of the study area were
Nichols (k/a Hay Ranch) in Kobeh Valley (2135) and, near
Secret Canyon, Nager's ranch (k/a Bank Ranch) (1016).
The broad Big Smoky and Monitor valleys, reaching south
far into Nye County, were also occupied early, at least'
partly in response to mining activity that focused on the
surrounding mountains in the 1860's and 1870' s. Givens '
ranch (2115), at the north end of the Big Smoky, was occupied
by the mid-1870's, as were Black Bird ranch (2108) near the
site of the Cape Horn Overland station (2109) and Henry
Schmidlein's ranch at the mouth of Kingston Canyon. Farther
south, one of the earliest ranches was Darrough's (35^) > with
a house built in 1863 that is still extant. In Monitor
Valley, early cattle ranches included Joseph Hodges' Box
Spring (2131) and Samuel Steininger's on Mosquito Creek
(2194). Another was "Anderson's Empire Ranch" an 1870's
cattle operation converted in the 1890's to sheep by William
Potts (Berg 19^2:59; Truett Papers).
87
Farther east and south, Little Fish Lake Valley was
host to Miller's Crow Creek Ranch (3^0) by 1876. At the
south end of this valley, J. D. Page, proprietor of Hot
Creek's "butchering gallows," established a ranch, perhaps
as early as 1865 (Lewis 1970:42). Stone Cabin valley also
saw early agricultural settlement: in 1875* Daniel Murphy
was running cattle at Stone Cabin ranch (2167) » earlier
known as the Fitzpa trick ranch. The Twin Springs Stock
ranch (2168), at the south end of Hot Creek valley, was
owned by Jewett Adams, one of the state's major stockmen
who served as Lt. Governor and Governor in the late 1870's
and through most of the 1880 's. Adams' political activities
did not prevent him from taking an active interest in his
ranch holdings. In September 1877 the Tybo Sun announced
Adams ' arrival in town and his plans to "look after stock
on his ranch near Twin Springs" (22 Sept. 1877:1). By 1880
the ranch employed twenty-five hands who "being cow boys they
were absent from home" when the federal census enumerator came
to call that year.
While most ranches were developed simply for farming and
stock growing, others were associated with stage or freight
stations at some period in their history. Some ranches
developed at existing stations; others may have preceded, and
later incorporated station functions, and some may have
served the dual purpose from the beginning. Regardless of
chronology, however, ranches of this type had in common their
location along major transportation routes, or at the junc-
tion of several roads, as well as proximity to water and
grazing necessary for both station and ranching operations.
Although the Pony Express was short lived, a number of
its hastily-built stations had a much longer subsequent
history as ranches (Welch 1979:30). Among these was Dry
Creek (2116) , which John Hickison developed into a substan-
tial sheep enterprise by WWI, with a dwelling, barn, shop and
bunkhouse (Nye Co. Records, Livestock Certificates). Smith
Creek station (^76) was acquired by Antonio Maestretti and
his brother in the 1870's. Roberts Creek (2139) and Grubbs
Well (2137) stations are today the site of working ranches
(Welch 1979:50). Diamond Springs (2151), also with current
ranching activity, was by 1879 home of W. F. Cox and a
telegraph station, and at the same time Sulphur Springs was
occupied by a man named Barnes.
The station/ranch phenomenon was not limited to former
Pony Express/Overland stops. Along the Eureka-Hot Creek-Tybo
routes developed in the late 1860's and early 1870's, Summit
(2195) station was by 1889 claimed by John Williams for stock
cattle (Truett Papers), and, as noted previously, C. W. Hicks
and the Moore brothers managed stations and stock operations
88
simultaneously (1880 Federal Census, Nye Co.; Truett Papers).
In Monitor Valley, there is evidence that Smith's station
(2184) was by 1880 site of a ranch operated by Michael
Corcoran (1880 Federal Census, Nye Co.). At the same time,
stationkeeper Thomas Morgan (1044) had a small herd of
cattle to tend as well as travelers and teamsters to care
for (1880 Federal Census, Nye Co.; Truett Papers).
A few ranches grew up at centers of mining activity,
usually after the mines had closed and the miners had, often
quite literally, "folded their tents" and moved away. Two
good examples are Hot Creek and Upper Hot Creek ranches
(324), which were developed in the early 20th century amid
the ruins of twin mining camps of the same names. In Little
Mill Creek Canyon on the eastern slope of the Kawich range,
discovery of gold and silver in 1905 led to formation of a
camp known variously as Gold Belt or Eden. Two ranches,
Eden Creek and Upper Eden Creek (337) subsequently occupied
the site and structures of this short-lived mining venture
(Blume 1977:11-129-132).
As noted in this study and elsewhere (Shepperson 1970) ,
19th century raining camps and towns of central Nevada
featured a decidedly international cast of characters.
Although less pronounced, and certainly less recognized,
that "cosmopolitanism" was also present in the region's
agricultural society.
The most frequently mentioned national group was the
Basque, which contributed significantly to expansion of the
region's sheep industry in the late 19th and early 20th
centuries. Other nationalities, however, also participated
in the settlement and agricultural development of the
region. Irish were represented by farmers and ranchers such
as Dan Callaghan in Grass Valley, William Smythe near Hot
Creek and Michael Corcoran in Monitor Valley. William
Potts, a Monitor valley sheepman, came from England. The
Germans included dairyman F. Gelleman in the northern Reese
River Valley, Daniel and George Ernst in Hot Creek, Leopold
Steiner near Austin, and Charles Goldbach, a sheep dealer
from the Belmont area. Swiss and Italians, despite their
overwhelming identification with the charcoal industry, also
included agriculturalists among their numbers, particularly
after the charcoal demand of the 1870's and 1880's declined.
Thus farms and ranches owned by Swiss and Italian immigrants
are found throughout the region: the Maestrettis at Smith
Creek, De Paoli, Mattei, Pedrioli and Romano in Diamond
Valley, Maggini in northern Monitor valley, Walti in Grass
Valley, Bordoli and Arigoni at Ox Spring on the east side of
Railroad Valley.
89
The central Nevada ranch, regardless of location, age,
type of livestock or ethnic origins of its operator,
basically consisted of one or more houses and an assortment
of barns, sheds, corrals and miscellaneous outbuildings. If
the operation were large, there might be a bunkhouse and
perhaps a dining area for hired hands. Very large barns
were uncommon, as it was generally the practice to winter
stock outdoors, even if they were hand-fed (Crofut 1970:89;
Carpenter 19^1:^-1-3) • For young and weak animals, an open
shed across one side of a corral was considered sufficient
bad-weather shelter. On ranches that served also as freight
or stage stations, a stable or barn might be available for
weary teams, and many ranchers built small barns for dairy
cattle or for particularly valuable cattle or sheep. Given
the arid climate, there was little need for hay storage, even
in the open sided hay barns common in states to the north and
east. Instead, hay was brought from the field by wagon and
piled into large, rounded stacks, accomplished through use of
a wooden, generally portable, derrick (Fife 19^8:225-239).
There was often a "hay corral" within the ranch complex
proper, but hay could also be stacked in outlying pastures
or brought to livestock on the range in wagons or sleds
(Crofut 1970: 89, 93) •
Other ranch structures included sheds for storing haying
machinery, wagons and other equipment, and perhaps a forge or
smithy. Unlike crop farms, which in the 20th century became
heavily mechanized, there were few opportunities for mecha-
nizing a livestock operation, so the number of machine sheds
on ranches tended to remain small. Also seldom seen were
corncribs or silos, since central Nevada's most viable crop
was hay, rather than corn.
The ranch also provided food and shelter for the
rancher, his family and his hands. The ranch house was com-
monly a low, one-story rectangular structure, with shallow
gable roof, entrance in one of the long sides, and seldom
more than three or four rooms (Trewartha 1948:179. 182). A
garden provided fresh vegetables in season, some of which
might be stored in cellars dug into the ground. Chicken
houses and perhaps an occasional hog house provided additional
sources of meat, which could be cured in a small stone
smokehouse .
Although most ranches had less than 10 functional
buildings (Trewartha 19^8:179). it is not uncommon to
encounter ranches with many more. As a rule, a large number
of buildings, many in various stages of decrepitude and dis-
use, reflects a long history of occupation on a ranch, in
which, due to plenty of space, new structures were erected
as needed and the older buildings gradually abandoned.
90
The materials of ranch construction were many, and
although quite varied had in common their ready accessibility
and low cost. In a region of long distances and fairly pri-
mitive transportation, the cost of manufactured building
materials, such as milled lumber and brick, tended to be
prohibitive, and much of the best lumber, when available,
generally went into the mines. Barbed wire, too, was expen-
sive at first; and when used was often to enclose large
areas of ground such as pasture, while cottonwood or juniper
stakes of random length, set close together as a "palisade,"
were commonly used for the ranchstead's corrals and pens.
Another fence type featured rails or saplings notched into
vertical posts.
Until well into the 20th century, ranch building con-
struction was almost exclusively a function of the kind of
materials locally available: cottonwood, juniper, willow,
adobe and stone. These materials were seldom worked by
accomplished carpenters or masons; rather they were
"finished" only to the extent absolutely necessary, and then
assembled with great dispatch. The result was a group of
buildings "not of very ostentatious or even comfortable pre-
tensions"--at least at first (Reese River Reveille 30 April
1864:3). The functional invariably won out over the aesthe-
tic, and scavenged materials, such as corrugated metal, rail-
road ties and even flattened metal cans eventually appeared
on ranch structures. As long as it served the purpose, any
material was useful: ranchers' priorities for investment lay
in land and livestock rather than buildings (Clawson 1950:
200) .
Ranch structures, regardless of use, tended to have a
low, long rectangular shape, with a shallow-pitched shed or
gable roof. Dwellings and animal sheds generally had
entrances in the long side, while other structures such as
barns or machine sheds often had doors on a gable end.
Although wall materials tended to be rough, door and window
openings were often framed with more carefully cut, or even
milled lumber. Dirt roofs were extremely common (Blume 1977:
1-40) , as most available wood was unsuitable for shingles,
and manufactured shingles, like so many other things, were
scarce and expensive in 19th and early 20th century central
Nevada. Furthermore, the dry climate meant that shingles,
whose main purpose is to shed water, were not really neces-
sary. The dirt roof, on the other hand, was certainly
economical, and easy to construct:
"The truss system usually employs trimmed tree trunks or
large limbs, the rafters being made of limbs smaller
than the ridgepole or headers. The system is then
nailed or tied together. When the rafter system has
91
been connected to the ridgepole and headers and the
joist system is in place, branches are spread over the
rafters and secured at the ridgepole. These are then
covered with canvas, burlap, pieces of metal, grass,
shredded bark, paper products or other kinds of flat
materials. A layer of dirt, usually between ^ and 12
inches thick, is placed over the whole ..." (Blume
1977:1-^-0) .
Stone construction was utilized throughout the study
area, again principally due to availability of the material.
Perhaps more precisely termed "rubble rock" construction,
this method employed undressed stone laid up dry or with a
mud or lean concrete mortar. If the rocks were extremely
irregular, the resulting wide joints might be filled with
small stones and then mortared, in a simple form of
galletting (Blume 1977:1-^1).
Although the arch is a traditional way of bridging
openings in masonry, it appears to have been seldom used
outside of towns. Instead, door and window lintels were made
with wood slabs, square timbers or, much more rarely, stone.
One of the few exceptions so far recorded in the study area
is the dwelling at Stone House Ranch in Monitor Valley. This
house is unusual for several reasons: it has two full
stories, and the front wall is constructed of carefully
dressed random ashlar. On this elevation, too, first-floor
openings are surmounted by shallow segmental arches of brick.
Bricks were easier to work with than stone, which probably
accounts for their use here. One reason for the use of
arches at all may have been to distribute the weight of the
masonry above: in the more common single-story building,
the amount of stone above door and window openings was
generally small enough to eliminate the need for arches
entirely.
There is a great variety of stone construction to be
found in the study area. Minimun's Station (100^-) near
Bowman Creek features a small rubble-rock dwelling, with
shallow dirt roof and stone slab lintels. On Potts' Ranch
(1010) is a small barn or machine shed constructed of rather
large rocks that may have been very slightly dressed to give
a roughly rectangular shape. The shingled roof is steeply-
pitched, by area standards, and the gable end above the wide
entrance is sheathed with rough clapboards. At Butler's
(103^) is a long, rectangular stone house with a substantial
exterior chimney and the ubiquitous dirt roof. Several stone
buildings are found on the Segura Ranch (1038). One, a small
barn or animal shelter, has thick mortar joints in its
rubble walls, and a wide "dutch" door in the gable end.
Perhaps due to the width of the structure, the roof system
92
includes two log purlins, as well as log ridgepole and
plates .
The dugout (many examples of which are found in mining,
rather than ranching, areas, perhaps because many originated
as prospects) also employed stone in its construction.
Excavated into the slope of a hill, the dugout was a rela-
tively simple structure, although it could be quite sub-
stantially built. A good example may be found at Cloverdale
Ranch (352), which has a variety of interesting and well-
preserved structures. Another rather crude dugout is at
Spanish Spring (36*0 » 20 feet square and constructed of small
boulders .
Several stone ranch houses, which appear to date from
around the First World War, show slightly more attention to
"style" than is generally the case with ranch houses recorded
in the study area. The houses at Moore's and Pritchard's
stations have clearly quoined corners, which not only provide
a decorative touch but contribute to the strength of the
walls. At Hot Creek Ranch (32*0, the main house (c. 1910) is
constructed of well-cut stone, and has a simple wood cornice,
porches with short columns on pedestals, and a high conical
roof projection at one corner.
Buildings of fired brick are seldom found on central
Nevada ranches, although a brick house from the 1880 's has
been recorded at Twin Rivers Ranch (2211) in Big Smoky Valley
(Truett Papers). Adobe brick, an ancient tradition in the
southwestern U.S., was sometimes used where there was a con-
venient water source (Blume 1977:1-39)- One of the earliest
dated examples in the study area is the ruin of the stage
station at San Antonio (356), which combines firebrick and
adobe, and was once washed with an adobe plaster on the
inside (Blume 1977:11-2^-25). Potts Ranch and Morrison
Ranch (1029) each have several adobe structures; loss of a
roof on one at Morrison's vividly illustrates the effect of
weathering on the material, which seems to "melt" in the
rain. A far better preserved (and certainly more recent)
adobe house is at Upper Hot Creek Ranch. Its neat bricks are
cemented with mud, the windows have manufactured sash, and
the whole is covered with a shallow hipped roof.
Mud-wall construction was also employed in central
Nevada (R. L. McGonagle, personal communication). Like
adobe brick, mud-wall construction was practiced by native
populations of the southwestern U.S. Also known as
puddling, the method involved erection of walls in place,
with layers of moistened clay set in forms, each layer dried
before the next was added--a technique similar to some
methods of pouring concrete today (Foley 1980:88). A good
93
example is site 1005, where the one-story ranch house still
retains impressions of wooden forms used in building up the
walls .
Wood construction involved either framing or mass
walling. Mass walling probably occurred earlier in the
historical development of the study area, due to shortage
of milled lumber for framing and the greater local avail-
ability of sizable timbers in the first decades of settle-
ment. Best known is the "log cabin" form of timber walling
in which logs, simply peeled or sometimes roughly squared,
were laid horizontally, notched together at the corners and
sometimes chinked with mud. Good examples include Dry Lake
Cabin (1032) and buildings at site 1033 in Little Smoky
Valley. Another is a well-preserved barn on the old Page
Ranch in Hot Creek Canyon (2177), built with horizontally-
laid logs of 9"-H" diameter. Log roof trusses are given
additional support on the exterior by vertical wood posts
that function as pilasters or buttresses. A variation on
this theme is the small building near a well in Little Smoky
Valley (1040). The long side walls are laid horizontally,
and are held in place by a vertical post at each end, while
the gable end walls are of vertical plank construction.
The size of log structures was to some extent limited
by the length of timber available, and local builders exer-
cised varying degrees of ingenuity in this regard. The
problem could be solved in several ways, one of which was
"modular" construction of cribs or pens side by side.
Another was use of corner posts, or posts at intervals along
a wall, into which horizontal members could be notched or
pegged. Finding timbers of sufficient length for ridgepoles
and purlins could also be a problem; it could be solved by
using trusses instead, without a ridgepole, or by construc-
ting a ridgepole from short lengths and supporting them on
posts .
It is also appropriate to mention here that railroad
ties were also used in mass-wall construction. Examples
recorded in the study area to date include 20-mile Shack
(1051) and structures on the Ferguson Ranch (2136).
Vertical timber mass walling in the U.S. is generally
associated with the French occupation of Canada and the
Great Lakes -Mississippi regions. In the Antelope Range of
central Nevada, however, "Parker's" place (1042) has a most
interesting example of this technique. The walls of the
little house are built of totally unworked log posts set
directly into the ground (technically known as poteaux-en-
terre construction) . Voids between each pair of posts are
filled with lengths of sapling, and the chinks are daubed
94
with mud. The nearly-flat roof has a covering of dirt over
closely-set pole rafters, and long, slender poles along the
roof edges keep the dirt in place.
Although no specific examples appear in the available
site data, vertical plank walling should be mentioned here,
as instances undoubtedly can be found in the study area
(Blume 1977:1-^6). Posts and studs are not used in this
construction; rather, the walls might be built something like
a gate or door-, with boards placed vertically on one or more
cross members, and the walls then simply nailed to the floor-
ing system and together at the corners. This is a very weak
structural system, but a ranch house of this construction in
southwestern Idaho has been dated to c. I860 (Dennett,
Muessig & Associates 1979) ■
Whereas in mass walling the weight of the roof is car-
ried by the walls, in timber or box frame construction the
weight is distributed to a small number of vertical elements,
generally corner posts. The most common variation of this
form is the balloon frame, developed in the mid-19th century,
in which a series of closely-spaced studs along the walls
replaces the need for heavy corner support. In 19th century
central Nevada, it is possible that wood frame structures
were more common in mining, rather than ranching, areas
(Blume 1977: 1-39) • However common, their lumber was valuable,
as the many instances in which wood frame structures were
moved from one camp to another clearly attest.
Wood frame buildings did occur on ranches, however,
particularly in the later 19th and 20th centuries when
improved transportation had rendered milled lumber more
available. Their most notable characteristic is the variety
of materials used as exterior sheathing. Corrugated sheet
metal is found at Spencer Hot Springs (1003) » Bartine Ranch
(1015), Ardan's Well (10^1), Stone Cabin (2167) and the
Peavine Ranches (217^, 2175) » out of many possible examples.
Although not associated with a ranch, the two structures at
Baxter Spring (363) are worth mentioning because their walls
are faced with flattened metal cans lapped over one another
like large shingles. Vertical board siding, with or without
battens, is found on many ranches, such as Stone Cabin, Dugan
(2178) and Bellehelen (2160) ranches. Horizontal wood siding
seems to appear principally on dwellings, rather than out-
buildings, and is generally wide plank or shiplap, rather
than clapboarding. Houses utilizing this form of siding
include dwellings on the Potts (1010), Dugan and Feavine
ranches, and on an abandoned ranch on the east side of
Diamond Valley (1035).
95
Wattle and daub construction is also found on central
Nevada ranches :
"In wattle-and-daub construction, a wooden framework--
usually made of willow because this tree is readily-
available and grows quite straight — is built and then
filled with rocks and mortar. Mud is applied to both
surfaces of the finished wall. . . . Log posts, placed
vertically in the ground . . . act as studs for the
framework. For a structure the size of a house, these
vary in diameter between 2 and 8 inches . . . (the size
of the structure is usually dictated by the size of the
wood available for the framework) . Sticks from 1 to 3
inches in diameter are then fastened (usually with
nails) to the posts, horizontally from the ground up,
to form an exterior and an interior wall. . . . The
void created between these walls is then filled with a
mixture of mud and rock material. . . . The finished
wattle wall is daubed with mud . . . (Blume 1977:
Kensler (Blume 1977:1-^3-^) seems to link wattle and
daub construction to earlier Paiute and Shoshone reed and
twig huts (p. 19) • A group of houses built with wattle and
daub on the Peavine Ranch is reported to be of historic
Paiute origin (Blume 1977:11-28), but this method of con-
struction is also found on other ranches, at which no parti-
cular instance of historic native occupation has to date been
documented. An abandoned ranch in Big Smoky Valley (1005)
has an animal shed of wattle and daub, and Wilkins ' Ranch
(1006), to the west, features a low, broad-roofed barn and
small dwelling built in this manner. The roof of the little
house is interesting in that it is edged all around with a
shallow plank "frame," probably added to prevent elements of
dirt roof from rolling or washing off.
Finally, at Monitor Ranch (1036), a long rectangular
animal shed displays an unusual variation of wattle and daub
construction, The walls are laid up with quite long,
straight peeled saplings that appear to be laced together
roughly on the log cabin principal, but this lacing occurs
at intervals along the wall plane rather than at the corners,
creating "panels" that permit a structure of rather long
dimension. On the exterior, at least, the walls do not
appear to have been daubed at all, and it is possible that
the sapling wall alone provided sufficient shelter for the
rancher's livestock.
Despite the present lack of detailed, site-specific
information, it is clear that the ranches of central Nevada
have much to reveal about the historical and environmental
96
circumstances of the region's agricultural settlement and
subsequent development. The physical characteristics of
ranches --number , form, type and arrangement of buildings and
structures, the materials and methods of cons true tion--can
tell a great deal about how people and their livestock lived,
both in relationship to each other and to their natural
surroundings. The collective history of the ranches, whether
abandoned or still active operations, gives sharp focus to
the inter connectedness of human activities in the region.
Ranchers and their families were significant participants in
the settlement of central Nevada. Their garden crops and
meat contributed a pleasant and nutritious variety to the
diets of towns and mining camps. Their houses and stables
provided respite for weary travelers and teams along crucial
arteries of transportation and commerce. Raising of sheep
and cattle contributed substantially to the importance of
the livestock industry in the state. And, in a larger con-
text, ranchers' efforts to use, and yet conserve, the land
and its fragile plant and water resources contributed to the
development of new public policy regarding the western--and
central Nevada—range.
97
Town and Valley: Expressions of Community
The fortunes of central Nevada mining camps and towns
were extremely varied, although all began with the premise
that ore rich enough to make everyone wealthy was immediately,
or soon to be, at hand. As a rule this turned out to be sel-
dom the case, or for only very short periods of time, and the
legacy of many camps is today only a handful of adits and a
remembered name. The quality of the ephemeral was a hallmark
of the region's mining settlements, well-documented as early
as 1881 by Myron Angel in his massive History of Nevada .
Angel's thumbnail descriptions, as well as those offered by
other contemporary writers and more recent chroniclers, pro-
vide brief, vivid views of many of the region's early mining
communities .
Writing from Reese River in 1866, J. Ross Browne
characterized Clifton as "a broad street flanked by the
wrecks of many frame shanties," having "died about two years
ago" when its populace moved up the canyon to Austin (Browne
1866:27). About the latter town, he had more to say, noting
frame buildings "well constructed, and ornamented ... by
rows of scrubby pines stuck in the ground" (Browne 1866:3o).
He described "the best private residences . . . substantially
built of stone," and "many fine brick houses" (Browne 1866:
36) . In stark contrast was Canyon City, further up the Reese
River Valley on Big Creek, which "two years ago" had a post
office, stores, saloons, and a telegraph line but was in 1866
"a long street of empty houses" (Browne 1866:41). By 1881,
the "houses, including the cabins" had "departed" (Angel
1881:4-72) .
Angel, writing less than 20 years after the first mines
opened at Reese River, noted that at Jacobsville, first Lander
County seat, there was "nothing left but a single farmhouse"
(Angel 1881:4-73) • Another ephemeral town was Geneva, once
site of "some fine stone buildings and numerous log and cloth
houses" of which little remained in 1881 (Angel 1881:4-73).
Bunker Hill, on Big Smoky Creek, had from 1863 to 1865 been
a "thriving place," but soon the town was "but a collection
of miners' cabins" (Angel 1881:472). Another brief venture
was Amador, seven miles north of Austin, about which Angel
said "the town was built chiefly of cloth, and has gradually
disappeared" (Angel 1881: +72) .
Whereas Lander City, which had several hundred inhabi-
tants in 1863 » was by 1881 "known only in name" (Angel 1881:
4-73), Belmont, the Nye County seat, was more fortunate.
Although mining production varied from year to year, the town
was able to rise beyond the camp stage to boast houses and
commercial blocks of stone, brick, adobe and wood, and
98
sidewalks "of wood and stone" (Angel 1881:519-520). lone,
on the other hand, suffered from loss of county seat status,
and by 1881 contained two idle quartz mills and 25 people
housed in "chiefly frame structures" (Angel 1881:525).
The character of mining camps altered little between
the first boom period (1860-80) and the second (1900-10).
Although the latter boom resulted in resumption of mining
in many portions of the study area, much early 20th century
activity occurred in Nye County at prospects old and new,
among them Pine Tree Camp near Manhattan, Baxter Springs,
Pueblo and Millett in Big Smoky Valley (Berg 19^2:162;
Ingalls n.d.rl). Manhattan itself first grew under canvas,
but frame buildings, and eventually solid brick and stone
structures, soon gave the town an air of permanence (Berg
1942:100), as happened also at Round Mountain, and at
Tonopah on a much larger scale. Aside from these towns,
however, the short-lived camp remained the rule, an often
disorderly jumble of tents, shacks, stone dugouts, crude
masonry buildings and frame structures, the latter not in-
frequently moved in from other camps. These transitory
population centers included Atwood, full of "tents and
houses" (Tonopah Bonanza 2 May 1903:7), Ellendale, Jett
(which consisted of "several cabins and a boarding house"
(Berg 1942:46)), Golden Arrow, Monarch, Silverbow and
Clifford.
A mining camp, whether of the 19th or early 20th century,
could well be described as a largely "unstructured, unorga-
nized patch" of concentrated activity (Mellinger 1971:257) »
with rudimentary government, minimal public facilities and
few of the institutions associated with more organized com-
munity life. The mining culture was characterized by a
"tremendous acquisitiveness," accentuated perhaps by the fact
that fortune-hunting in the mountains of central Nevada was
largely a matter of substantial risk and no small amount of
luck (Burkhart 1952:13). An equally significant characteris-
tic was the high degree of transiency, as people moved in and
out of camps, and the camps themselves waxed and waned
according to the fortunes of the mines.
In such a context, social institutions that required
investment in something other than a chance at material
wealth developed only with some difficulty. Their existence
thus represented a public attitude that suggested a society
gone beyond the camp stage,, a society in which concern for
quality of life approached that for quality of the ores.
In a place such as Reveille, which in 1880 consisted of
two hotelkeepers , one bookkeeper, five miners, a prostitute
and a "gentleman" (1880 Federal Census, Nye Co.), the need
99
for formal social organization was clearly limited, as it
was in the great majority of central Nevada's mining camps.
But in a few cases, a combination of corporate investment,
reasonably sustained productivity, and expansion and diver-
sification of the business community created a feeling of
stability among the population that was translated into
establishment of schools, churches, libraries, and social,
literary, labor and fraternal organizations.
Of the many one-time population centers in central
Nevada, only a very few developed beyond the camp stage to
the point where they might more properly be called towns .
Most notable, of course, were Austin, Eureka and Tonopah,
each originally the locus of a very large mining boom, which
soon became important regional political, commercial and
transportation foci as well. Belmont, though it never grew
very large, clung to county seat status long after the area
mines ceased to be very productive. This may have been due
to its central location in Nye County, and to the fact that
until the rise of Tonopah in 1900, no other Nye County mining
communities approached Belmont in size or longevity. Belmont
was able, by virtue of its political position and attendant
commercial concentration, to sustain a feeling of community
and retain community institutions. Similarly, Battle Moun-
tain developed less as a mining town than a transportation
and commercial center, thanks to the Central Pacific
Railroad. Tybo, Manhattan and Round Mountain also exhibited
outward indications of community development, although for
relatively short periods of time.
Although large-scale corporate investment was crucial
to successful exploitation of central Nevada's mineral
resources, it tended to create adversary relationships be-
tween miners and their employers, and one result was the
formation of miners' unions (Smith 1967:202-203; see also
Lingenfelter 197^0. Early unions tended to be local affairs,
developing informally in response to immediate situations.
An early example was at Austin in 1865, when Reese River
miners were invited "to respond to a proposed reduction in
wages by certain San Francisco incorporations" (Reese River
Reveille 5 Jan. 1865:1). Mining in the Eureka district was
of a heavily corporate nature, and organizations such as the
Ruby Hill Miners' Union and the ill-fated Charcoal Burners*
Association (see Earl 1969. Grazeola 1969) were developed in
response. By the time of the Tonopah boom, labor unions
represented many trades and were much more organized. Most
influential was the Western Federation of Miners, dating from
1893» which "enjoyed a prosperous period" from 1900 to 1907
(Nevada Comm. of Labor, Report 1917-18:22). The early years
in Tonopah saw the organization of a variety of other trades,
including carpenters and electrical workers, machinists,
musicians, and barbers (Ibid. 27-28).
100
Fraternal organizations, although formally established
for social and benevolent purposes, no doubt had a labor
dimension, if only because their membership tended to be
composed of like-minded individuals. Many of these groups
had national affiliations, for example the I00F (with lodges
in Austin, Eureka, Belmont, Battle Mountain, Tybo and
Grantsville) , Templars (Eureka), the Masons (in Austin,
Belmont and Eureka) and Knights of Pythias (Eureka, Austin
and Battle Mountain) (Angel 1881:240-46, 249, 251-56, 258-
59) . Other groups included the Ancient Order of Hibernians
and the Irish-American Benevolent Association, both in Austin
(Angel 1881:262; Ancient Order of Hibernians, Austin, Record
of Meetings for 1874) , and the Independent Order of Foresters
in Eureka.
When possible, both labor and fraternal organizations
built lodge halls. Most of these were in the larger towns
of Eureka, Austin, and Tonopah, but the Masons' built a hall
in Belmont (1874) as did the Miners' Union in Berlin (Berlin
Miners' Union, 1902). Lacking buildings of their own, many
groups met above stores and town halls, or shared space with
other organizations. The latter was often the case with
women's groups. For example, the Austin Masons' female
auxiliary, Eastern Star, met in the Masonic hall, and that
town's Literary Association shared space in the Irish
American Hall (Eastern Star Records, n.d.; Austin Literary
Association, Minutes I879-) .
While labor and fraternal organizations were by defini-
tion male strongholds, women in the larger central Nevada
communities participated in literary societies and women's
clubs. The latter were strictly for women, but common
literary interests drew both sexes, as was the case in
Austin's Library Association. Tybo also boasted a literary
society, the object of which was "the mental improvement of
its members" male and female (Tybo Literary Society Record
Book, 1876-80) . Held weekly at one or another member's
house, meetings included such activities as oration, poetry,
geographical games, instrumental music and writing exer-
cises. Although the social aspect of such gatherings helped
to sustain interest, they were not without serious value.
Mary M. Godat, who served as president of the Tybo Literary
Society during January -April 1880 and was later elected
Wyoming's first female legislator, attributed her success
to the "training in parliamentary law" she received in Tybo
(Ibid. ) .
The Nevada Federation of Women's Clubs, organized in
1908, included among its affiliates clubs in Tonopah and
Manhattan. The latter, officially named the Toiyabe Club,
had the "smallest membership in the Federation" (Nevada
101
Federation of Women's Clubs, Yearbook 1913-1^:^9), but was
active enough. The group had a clubhouse and library, and
in 1913-1^ provided the local school with drinking fountains
and playground equipment, and served refreshments during the
1914 July 4 festivities (Nevada Federation of Women's Clubs,
Yearbook 1913-1^:33) .
Libraries and reading rooms were not unknown in central
Nevada mining towns, but a transient population and pre-
carious tax base worked against public funding of such
institutions (Newman 1969:5)' In most population centers,
church, union or civic groups took the initiative in organiz-
ing circulating libraries and reading rooms, but in other
cases a few books at the local newsstand or post office suf-
ficed (Newman 1969:6). The only known instance of construc-
tion of a building specifically for library purposes occurred
at Tonopah. Tonopah's first library was assembled through
donations, and like much else in town first opened in a tent.
In 1905 » Grace Roberts Moore donated a town lot, and con-
struction funds were raised through public events and enter-
tainments for a library then built by John J. Hill (Newman
1969:28) .
Churches were another means by which people in central
Nevada's mining towns sought a feeling of community, but
religious development progressed with no little difficulty.
In camps and towns filled with "speculators and gamblers",
transients and large numbers of single men (Trout 1916:146),
perhaps the most that could be said was that "if not the-
oretically religious," the population was "for the most part
practically so" (Angel 1881:191). This "practicality" tended
to give short shrift to religious observances; as F. S.
Spaulding discovered in 1905. "Lent does not seem to make
any difference in Tonopah" (Spaulding, 31 March 1905) .
It is interesting to note that, unlike the earlier
agrarian frontiers of America, revivalism and camp meetings
gained few followers in Nevada (Trout 1916:1^9; Angel 1881:
195) • Instead, denominations with "strong centralized
government" --Roman Catholic, Episcopalian and Methodist in
particular—had the most success (Trout 1916:150). However,
churches, like much else in the region, were at the mercy of
the mining economy, and their histories tended to follow a
common pattern. Initial organization would be followed by
purchase of a lot and erection of a church, which in most
cases was soon after sold as local mines closed and the con-
gregation moved away (Trout 1916:159) •
Despite these difficulties, churches were erected in
most of central Nevada's larger towns. Episcopalians built
in Austin (St. George's, c. 1873). Eureka (St. James, 1871) ,
102
Belmont (St. Stephen's 1874), Tonopah (St. Mark's, 1904),
and Battle Mountain (St. Andrew's, 1905) (Trout 1916:152-3;
Bradley 1959:22). Catholics attended Mass at St. Brendan's
in Eureka and St. Augustine's in Austin, and Methodists
organized in Eureka (1875), Ruby Hill (I876) and Austin
(1864) (Trout 1916:157-8; Angel 1881:210). Austin's
Methodist Episcopal Church was called the "largest in the
state" after the Catholic church in Virginia City (Angel
1881:210). It was built in I865 with funds raised through
sale of stock in the Methodist Mining Co., a corporation
organized when parishioners donated not cash, but interests
in mining claims, to the building fund. The company even-
tually realized over $250,000, and was able to build a fine
church and "at the same time serve the Lord, do good, and
make money" (Angel 1881:210). Unfortunately, Austin's first
boom collapsed before the full costs of construction were
met. The building was "sold for a courthouse," and later
re-acquired by the Methodists' Church Extension Society
(Trout 1916:156) .
The work of the Presbyterians, although they were as
strongly centralized as the Catholics, Methodists and
Episcopalians, was "expensive, and not as a whole success-
ful" (Angel 1881:214), as two examples show. A church was
established in Austin in 1864, with services held in the
county courthouse; but the White Pine boom lured many members
away, and the group ceased to meet after 1873 (Angel 1881:
216). More dramatic was the fate of Eureka's Presbyterian
church, organized in 1873- One Sunday in 1881 the pastor,
George Gallagher, stood before his congregation, "renounc£ed]
the tenets of orthodoxy, resigr£ed] his charge" and became a
Unitarian--an act hardly designed to further the cause of
Presbyterianism in that town (Angel 1881:216-7) .
Labor unions, fraternal organizations, women's clubs
and churches all functioned as visible expressions of the
search for, and a sense of, community in the camps and towns
of central Nevada. Despite transiency and preoccupation
with wealth (or lack thereof), the larger camps and the
towns at least brought people together in sufficient numbers
to foster development, however tenuous, of these community
institutions .
The enormous role of mining in the region's history has
tended to obscure the fact that acts of community building
were not limited to the inhabitants of mining towns. On the
contrary, the valleys of central Nevada may have sheltered
far more durable communities, in spite of the handicaps of a
small population and great distances.
103
There were, basically, two societies in central Nevada,
one dependent upon ore and the ability to extract and process
it; the other upon the natural environment and the ability to
live and prosper under its constraints. The two societies
were to an extent interdependent: townspeople ate the
farmer's foodstuffs and meat, fed their horses with the
rancher's hay and oats, and when travelling from town to
town enjoyed the hospitality of the way stations. In turn,
ranchers and farmers frequented local businesses, deposited
their crop and livestock earnings in local banks, and on
occasion invested in local mines.
Although the mining and agricultural societies had
common interests, they operated under very different pre-
mises. While there was always a chance, however remote in
actuality, that one might realize sudden riches in the mining
economy, prosperity in the agricultural sector demanded
investment not only of money, but of time and patience,
neither of which was in large supply in a mining camp. Fur-
thermore, agriculture was very much a family affair, in
contrast to the overwhelmingly male societies of mining
camps, and of towns in their first boom. Thus central
Nevada's agricultural society was characterized by a conti-
nuity and persistence, despite vagaries of weather and market
forces, that fostered a sense of community far beyond that
found in the large majority of mining camps.
Owing to the sparse population, great distances and
continual demands of ranch life, the agricultural society did
not participate extensively in religious and social activi-
ties that were the outward expressions of community in towns.
Although a visit to town, for shopping or business reasons,
brought members of the ranch community in contact with people,
events and ideas outside the valleys, ranch families were
still relatively isolated from one another, and certainly
from ranches in valleys other than their own.
The local post office, the way station and the school
appear to have contributed significantly toward lessening
this isolation. The post office and stage station provided
access to, and communication with, the world outside the
valley confines. They also presented an opportunity for com-
munication within the valley, as inhabitants came in from
distant ranches to check the mail or pick up goods or equip-
ment brought in by stage or freight. Coming a fair way on
rough roads, members of the valley community would probably
linger awhile, exchanging news and views and information, and
perhaps make a few purchases if the postmaster or station
keeper kept a small stock of goods or staples on the
premises .
104
The rural school, because it was locally administered,
paid for and attended by the members of the valley society,
also appears to have functioned as an expression of com-
munity. Schools were not unique to rural areas: all of
central Nevada's larger towns, and a few smaller ones, had
schools at one time or another (see Nevada Supt. of Public
Instruction, Annual Reports 1865-) • But lack of formal
religious and social organizations among the ranching popu-
lation meant that the local school often functioned as the
real center of social and community activity in the valleys
(Trout 1916:148; Gaw 1956:38).
Those characteristics of life in 19th century Nevada--
transiency, distance and poor roads --hampered , but did not
discourage, development of education in the region (Gaw
1956:37). Organization of local school districts, with
early provision for consolidation, was an effective response
to these conditions. Local administration was certainly
more practical in many isolated areas of central Nevada, and
consolidation helped the educational system deal with
changing fortunes of mining districts and the ranch popu-
lation (Gaw 1956:1, 11; King 1954:143).
Construction of school buildings was largely a local
responsibility, and lack of public funds, particularly in
the early decades, meant that many schools were built
through private subscription (Gray 1948:37). Predictably,
this resulted in schools of varying materials and quality.
Statewide statistics for 1865 reported buildings of wood and
brick, and also several (materials unspecified) that "dis-
grace the state" (Nevada Supt. of Public Instruction 1865:9).
In the report for 1877-78, the range of materials had
increased to include buildings of stone and adobe, and again
there was a handful deemed "unfit for use" as well as several
described as "rented" (Nevada Supt. of Public Instruction
1877-78).
Although central Nevada's first schools were located in
principal mining centers where most of the population lived,
spread of settlement throughout the region soon required
additions to the educational system. The result was estab-
lishment of "strictly ranch schools," for children of
farmers, ranchers and hands, each school organized and
operated by the local agricultural community (King 1954:129).
It did not necessarily follow, however, that organization of
a ranch school meant construction of a proper school
building . Buldings there were, for example at Silver Creek
(466) , near Millett's in Big Smoky Valley (1008), at Ox
Spring (347), Iowa Canyon (467) and Diamond Valley (1055).
But in other cases, a room in a ranch or farmhouse was
105
sufficient, as in the Reese River school district and in the
early years of education at Silver Creek (King 195^:129).
Although funding and operation of ranch schools involved
the participation of all families in the school district,
some ranchers and their families seem to have been particu-
larly active in fostering education in their valley com-
munities. Whether this interest resulted from a school
being located at a family's own ranch has not been determined,
but it is certainly possible that this was indeed the case.
Reports from the State Superintendent of Public Instruction,
particularly those from the 1890-1925 period, help to chart
the formal participation of ranchers, their wives and grown
children in local education, as school district clerks and
as teachers. Examples include the Maestrettis (Smith Creek
School District), the Bardolis at Ox Spring (Cherry Spring,
later Italian School District), the Steiners near Austin
(Park School District), the Watts at Silver Creek, and the
Ernsts and Goldbachs in Monitor Valley (Pine Creek School
District). For several of these families, involvement in
school affairs stretching to World War I and in some cases
beyond, is illustrative of their long-term investment,
financial and personal, in central Nevada's agricultural
community. Antonio Maestretti was farming on Smith Creek as
early as 1879. as was George Watt at Silver Creek; Daniel and
George Ernst, and Charles Goldbach were recorded as living
in Monitor Valley in 1870 ( 18'70 Federal Census, Nye Co.), and
Leopold Steiner was in the Austin area by that year.
Another early settler active in local school affairs was
George Schmidlein. The Kingston School District was orga-
nized by 1887, with Schmidlein (2209) as clerk. Schmidlein,
whom the federal census located in Big Smoky Valley in 1870,
clerked for the school district to 1900, and again from 1903
to 1910. Another Schmidlein, Walter, clerked for the "Big
Smoky School District," possibly a revival (and renaming) of
the old Kingston District.
A ranch that combined agricultural pursuits with post
office, way station or school activities would likely have
become a focal point, to a greater or lesser degree, within
the valley community of which it was a part, simply because
the multiple functions brought people together in one way or
another, and into contact with the oi tside world. West of
Garden Valley, on a stage line from Eureka, was the Tonkin
Ranch (2148), where at the turn of the century the Damele
family operated the Tonkin post office and served as clerks
and teachers for the Damele School District. The Romano
Ranch (2146), on the western edge of Diamond Valley, also
had stage connections to Eureka in the early 20th century.
A post office was located there in 1904-14 and 1919-29, and
106
members of the Romano family clerked for the Sulphur Springs
School District from 1899 to about 1910.
The Pine Creek District's school may have been located
on the Pine Creek Ranch (2189), which was in the 1870-80
period both a stage station and post office, and which Tasker
Oddie of Tonopah fame and later Governor of Nevada developed
as a summer home and "model farm" in 1902-03 (Tonopah Bonanza
7 June 1902:1; 25 April 1903s 6). William Potts' "Empire"
ranch (1010), on a stage line- from Austin, had a post office
from 1898 to 19^1. It also may have been the site of the
school for the Monitor District, for which Potts and his wife
served as clerks from 1893 to 1904. Cloverdale Ranch (352)
may have begun its long history as a way station as early as
186? . Operated by William, and later Archie, Farrington and
T. J. Bell, Cloverdale was not only an active stock operation
but also a post office in 1886 and 1889-99; and during the
1890*s Bell was clerk for the Cloverdale School District,
which very probably was centered on the Cloverdale ranch.
Many aspects of central Nevada history come together on
the region's ranches. Farmers and ranchers were central
Nevada's first real settlers--people who came to invest their
lives and fortunes in the long-term proposition of agriculture
and livestock raising. Thrown upon their own initiative, they
made full use of resources available to them. They construc-
ted their ranches of local materials; they sought water and
enhanced its usefulness by building irrigation systems and
dams, digging wells and erecting windmills; their livestock
fully exploited the potential of the range. Their per-
sistence, and the fact that they remained in place while the
mining economy and society ebbed and flowed .around them, gave
them important roles in developing and sustaining transpor-
tation and communications systems throughout the region, and
allowed them to develop a continuity and community that
underlies much of the central Nevada experience.
107
OCCUPATION AND IAND USE: A SYNTHESIS
Limitations imposed by the natural environment have
influenced human occupation and land use from the earliest
period. Arid climate, poor soils, temperature extremes and
lack of water have on the whole discouraged, if not pro-
hibited, extensive modification of the physical environment,
with the result that the land has remained relatively
unaltered by human occupation even to the present day.
Modification of the landscape—with cities, roads, farms,
artificial lakes --requires technology, and the will to
invest in technology is determined by the potential for high
returns. The severity of the central Nevada environment was
such that incentives to technological development by native
or Euro-American populations were, with the notable exception
of mining, for the most part lacking. The result was a pat-
tern of occupation and land use describable more as adapta-
tion to the environment rather than as manipulation or modi-
fication of it. The necessity to "make do" with available
resources was thus a hallmark of central Nevada life from
the earliest times.
The historic settlement pattern of central Nevada
developed out of two major forms of land use: extraction
of minerals and the range livestock industry. Mining
occurred, to a greater or lesser extent, in all the mountain
ranges, and required the use of a significant amount of the
region's water and timber resources. Central Nevada mining
was also characterized by high levels of technological
development, with much of the machinery and equipment of this
technology imported from California and moved from place to
place in response to new discoveries of ore. The range
livestock industry, which grew out of an initial scattering
of small farms, also utilized the region's limited water
resources, with most ranches located in or near the foot-
hills of mountain ranges, close to springs or streams.
Natural meadows sometimes existed near these water sources,
and where such meadows were lacking, ranchers developed
large and small irrigation systems to grow hay, barley, and
eventually alfalfa, the latter a staple of winter feeding.
The livestock industry required little in the way of tech-
nology, and was thus characterized by intensive use of
locally available resources. The various range types, from
sagebrush-grass to creosote, sustained both sheep and
cattle, although overgrazing was a problem as early as the
1880's. Ranch buildings and structures were until well into
108
the 20th century products of the local environment, con-
structed of stone, adobe, wattle and daub, pinyon and
juniper, and mud. Other materials were salvaged from the
mining sector, including milled lumber and corrugated metal.
Exploitation of early 20th century technological developments
in agriculture was limited principally to improvement of
irrigation systems (including pumps and windmills), use of
newer haying machines and introduction of barbed-wire
fencing.
Although mining and ranching coexisted in time and
space, settlement patterns arising from these activities
displayed important differences. Transiency was a notable
characteristic of central Nevada's mining history: while
many camps and towns were established during the late 19th
and early 20th centuries, only a small number lasted more
than a few years. Almost totally dependent upon richness of
ore and availability of technology to process it, most mining
camps were simply places for people to live while they
exploited mineral resources, rather than long-term invest-
ments in the development of communities. The principal
exceptions, Eureka, Austin, Battle Mountain, Tonopah (and
possibly Belmont) , achieved the status of viable communities
not only because they grew up in the richest mining districts,
but also because they participated actively in commercial and
transportation networks that encompassed all of central
Nevada, and functioned as service and market centers for
surrounding agricultural populations.
The agricultural sector, on the other hand, appears to
have displayed a greater degree of persistence and stability.
While mining camps rose and fell rapidly, their populations
sometimes moving en masse along with their buildings to new
sites, prime ranching areas (with the requisite abundance of
water and grazing) were quickly taken up--certainly by 1880
and perhaps even earlier. Although weather, market forces
and luck to a large extent determined- the success or failure
of ranching enterprises, association of a number of families
with individual ranches over many years , and long-term
occupation (by various persons) of many more, suggests a
continuity of life and society seldom found in all but the
largest and most durable of central Nevada's mining centers.
The physical landscape of central Nevada has altered
little in the course of the 20th century, many changes being
quantitative rather than qualitative. There are fewer
people, fewer population centers, fewer major roads, fewer
occupied ranches, and the individual prospector and small-
scale mining operation are now things of the past. Economies
of scale have resulted in the consolidation of many ranch
holdings, so that fewer ranchers own more land and more
109
livestock, and the abandoned ranch is a common phenomenon.
While basic activities of range livestock operation have
changed little since the mid-19th century, the Taylor Grazing
Act of 193^* establishment of the Bureau of Land Management
in 19^6, and of the Battle Mountain District in 1952, brought
extensive federal regulation to the region. This regulation
has become more important and more controversial as political,
demographic, energy and agricultural demands on the land have
increased. Mining has become exclusively a corporate
activity, and with improvements in transportation, miners
commute from existing towns, rather than setting up camps in
the old way. The mines of northern Lander County are close
by Battle Mountain, and not far from Winnemucca; and new
mining ventures around Tonopah have simply increased that
town's population. One of the few examples of recent town-
building is Gabbs , which grew up in the 19^0' s around a large
brucite operation run by Basic Refactories of Ohio (Nevada
Highways and Parks 15 (1955) : 29-30 ) .
The character of transportation has changed with the
loss of population and the coming of the automobile.
Beginning in the 1920 's state and federal governments
developed a network of paved roads, which resulted in the
concentration of travel along a few routes and abandonment
of many roads that had long served frieght and stage traffic.
Paving was expensive, so its use was limited; and the number
of people remaining in the foothills and valleys of central
Nevada was insufficient to permit maintenance of an elaborate
road network in an increasingly unpopulated region. Further-
more, the major impetus to the development of highways was,
once again after 70 years, the moving of people through
central Nevada, principally to and from California and then
to and from Reno/Cars on/Tahoe and Las Vegas, rather than
into the towns and valleys of the region (Elliott 1973:263) .
National enthusiasm for transcontinental travel was first
generated by the Lincoln Highway Association, whose "demon-
stration" route was completed through Nevada in 1926
(Elliott 1973:263). running through Eureka and Austin. An
alternative route, from Ely to Los Angeles, was the Midland
Trail (92*0, which followed roughly the old C urrent-Nyala
road and then went on to Tonopah (Lincoln Highway Association
1935: 7-8» 166). The old Humboldt route retained its impor-
tance as the main thoroughfare across Nevada with its inclu-
sion in the federal interstate system of the 1950's.
Concentration of traffic encouraged concentration of
people along these highways, and thus it is hardly accidental
that central Nevada's most durable population centers remain
Eureka, Austin, Battle Mountain and Tonopah. Their tradi-
tional roles as service centers for outlying agricultural
regions were augmented, beginning in the 1920 's, by a growing
110
tourist trade. Sportsmen and sightseers were encouraged to
visit by such organizations as C . C. Boak's Western Good
Roads and Tourist Routing Association in Tonopah, which
provided road maps and information to prospective travellers
(Boak papers, n.d.j King 195^:65, 68).
Central Nevada's participation in the state's tourist
trade has, however, been largely that of servicing people
en route to major centers of activity to the west and south.
Around the turn of the century, a popular interest in spas
and mineral waters led to the development of pools and baths
at Spencer Hot Springs (1003), Walti Hot Springs (214?) and,
most notably, Darrough's (35^ ) » where a 10-room hotel and a
bathhouse were built in 1908-09 (Berg 19^2:60-61). None of
these enterprises were located on main roads, however, and
their facilities did not in the long run attract much
business. Legalization of gambling in 1931 brought to
Nevada an industry that is now the state's most profitable,
but it developed principally in western Nevada and Las Vegas,
which were closest to the major metropolitan areas of San
Francisco and Los Angeles. Battle Mountain thus has derived
substantial income through provision of hotel, restaurant and
auto services to interstate traffic en route to Reno and Lake
Tahoe, while Tonopah has benefited from its location on the
highway between those centers and Las Vegas. Austin and
Eureka have enjoyed less success since the interstate sup-
planted the Lincoln Highway as the principal transcontinental
route, and the population of their outlying agricultural
regions has been too small to sustain significant commercial
activity. Eureka retains its status as county seat, but
Austin has recently lost the Lander County seat to Battle
Mountain, in continuation of a political phenomenon
encountered again and again in American settlement history.
However, the fact that "progress" has to a large extent
passed them by has resulted in the preservation, if only
through poverty, of much of Austin's and Eureka's 19th
century character. In recent years, appreciation of this
legacy has fostered local interest in maintenance, restora-
tion and repair, and in the development of a small tourist
industry based on a nationwide enthusiasm for structural
relics of the past.
Ill
CULTURAL RESOURCES SURVEY AND MANAGEMENT:
OBSERVATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The Bureau of Land Management has been charged through
a system of law and administrative rules with the identifi-
cation and protection of cultural resources on lands under
its jurisdiction. Ideally, such a mandate should result in
prompt instigation of systematic, comprehensive surveys to
identify and evaluate historic, architectural and archaeo-
logical resources, and the development of programs to ensure
protection or, when all else fails, adequate mitigation of
loss through full recording. Such goals are seldom realized,
however, in large part because cultural resources must com-
pete with other programs and priorities for funds and time.
Despite great gains during the past decade, it is unfortu-
nately still true that at all levels of government, cultural
resource management and protection tends to be a low-priority
item.
Within Nevada, as a whole, efforts to develop a compre-
hensive, systematic approach to cultural resource survey and
data management face a number of problems. In 1978 » Charles
Hall Page & Associates of San Francisco prepared a Procedures
Manual for cultural resource inventory in Nevada. The manual
included a list of twelve "findings" related to existing
survey activity in the state. Many of these findings are
still valid, for the state and also for federal agencies such
as the BLM. Because little has changed since 1978, and the
findings are important, it is appropriate to repeat most of
them here, with additional comments pertinent to this study
for the BLM-Battle Mountain District.
1. There are very few identified architectural resources
in the State of Nevada . In the Battle Mountain District, it
is perhaps more correct to say that, while many architectural
resources have been identified (through completion of site
forms), they have not been properly interpreted as
architecture .
2. Historic industrial sites have not been surveyed .
This is still true, despite work by Texas Tech University
which was largely limited to library research and included
very little field investigation or technological interpre-
tation.
3. There are no cultural resource surveys specifically
related to ethnic settlements and their history . The Battle
Mountain District, however, has noted when possible the
existence of resources associated with ethnic groups, for
example Chinese at Cortez and historic Native American
112
occupation in and around Tybo . In central Nevada, there
were few, if any, concerted attempts to establish "ethnic
settlements," and the immigrant population was by and large
scattered throughout the region. Exceptions are related to
occupation, for example camps for Swiss/Italian charcoal
burners .
h-. Archaeological resources surveys greatly outnumber
any other resource surveys . This is certainly the case
today, in large part because the archaeological community
has for many years taken a direct interest in archaeological
resources, which for those scholars are the only source of
information about prehistoric cultures. In contrast,
historians have not, until very recently, considered
cultural resources a useful form of documentation, or
worthy of study beyond the antiquarian. Architectural
history, which as a discipline derives from study of art
history, has traditionally focused on "high style" or
eastern colonial architecture. Only in recent years has
the value of vernacular and folk architecture been recog-
nized. Thus, lack of strong, and vocal, interest on the
part of the professional historical and architectural
communities has contributed significantly to the small
number (relative to archaeological investigations) of
historical and architectural surveys in many areas of the
U.S., including Nevada.
5. Most identification activities have been conducted
by federal agencies . This is hardly surprising, since the
vast majority of land in Nevada is federally-owned, and
federal agencies are bound by law and executive order to
identify and protect cultural resources under their
jurisdiction. Nevada's small population, and its concen-
tration in a few large cities, may also have contributed
to lack of interest in cultural resources surveys at the
state and local levels.
6. There is a wide variation in the content, degree
of thoroughness and quality of the existing survey activities
This variation is evident m surveys conducted m the BLM-
Battle Mountain District, as noted in this study's chapter
on Past and Current Investigations. Some of this variation
is inevitable, given the many different purposes of surveys
and levels of project planning. Some, however, is due to
lack of comprehensive research design and to lack of a con-
sistent recording format.
7. Cultural resources are being destroyed at an alarm-
ing rate in certain parts of the state . Vandalism, deteri-
oration, neglect, and pressures of population, tourism and
113
industrial development continue to take their toll. Without
broad public interest in preservation of cultural resources,
the best efforts of government will continue to have only
limited success.
8. There is no single agency in the state which
coordinates survey activity . Although the State Historic
Preservation Office is charged with responsibility for the
conduct of a statewide inventory of cultural resources, the
federal presence in Nevada is large enough to overshadow the
state effort, and the amount of cooperation between these
two levels of government is variable. Among federal
agencies, too, there seem to be problems of coordination,
with each agency going its own way, for the most part, on
matters involving cultural resource surveys. The geogra-
phical scope of surveys is often arbitrarily determined by
the proposed boundaries of a federal project (for example,
URS/Blume's survey for the Department of Energy) or, less
justifiably, by jurisdictional boundaries of Federal
agencies. The current project to develop overall research
designs for future archaeological investigation in Nevada
should, if successfully implemented, improve the situation
considerably, as would establishment of similar research
designs for historical surveys.
9. There is no central location for the collection
and storage of inventory data from around the state .
Although the Nevada State Museum is the designated state
repository for archaeological survey data, lack of funding
appears to have limited the Museum's ability to keep up
with the large amount of survey information being generated
by government agencies and individual investigators. Fur-
thermore, the Museum's program is geared primarily to
archaeological resources, with historical and architectural
site data included only incidentally. As shown in the Past
and Current Investigations chapter of this study, there has
been unnecessary duplication of effort in the conduct of
historic site surveys. Many sites have been recorded
repeatedly, while many others have not been recorded at all.
Ideally, the Nevada State Historic Preservation Office
should be the central repository for historic and architec-
tural site data, where future researchers could quickly
determine what is already on record, and then develop sur-
veys to go beyond the existing data. Such a central repo-
sitory would allow researchers to study site data from
outside their own survey area, and to put their own findings
in a statewide or regional context.
114
In addition to the foregoing observations developed by
Charles Hall Page & Associates, several other comments can
be made concerning the BLM-Battle Mountain District's own
cultural resource programs. Basic concerns appear to be
lack of a comprehensive inventory, lack of contextual under-
standing of resources, and lack of public support for, or
interest in, recognition and protection of these resources.
On the plus side, the Battle Mountain District has made a
sincere effort to record, however rudimentarily, historic
resources encountered in the course of various field
investigations for other purposes, and also those brought
to its attention by the public. The District has also
directed some effort toward interpreting these resources,
through Unit Resource Analyses and Patrick Welch's historical
study of the Shoshone-Eureka Planning Unit. In the matter of
public interest, the BLM is hampered by the fact that the
"preservation constituency," actual or potential, is very
small, simply because so few people inhabit the region. Most
public interest in historic preservation appears to be focused
in the major towns, which are largely outside BLM jurisdic-
tion. Also, public interest in the BLM's cultural resource
programs may be colored by what seems to be resentment of the
Federal presence, caused in large part by rising political
and public controversy over land use and exploitation of
natural resources.
Of course, any action the Battle Mountain District
takes to ameliorate problems in cultural resource management
will require expenditure of time and funds above that now
allocated to these programs. There are, however, a number
of activities the District might initiate to at least
improve upon current efforts; they fall between the ultimate
goal of full-scale, comprehensive inventory and interpreta-
tion and the worst-case situation of doing nothing or
abandoning the programs entirely.
(1) The scope of current efforts to record historic resources
could be enhanced in the following way:
Prior to field investigation (for whatever actual
purpose) , BLM personnel and cultural resource contractors
should consult aerial photographs, survey maps and USGS
topographic maps, and note all instances of past and present
historic cultural remains located within the entire town-
ship(s) in which the field work is to occur. This should
include historic resources already recorded, if they have
not been subject to field examination, or if such examination
occurred more than a year ago.
115
Once in the field, investigators should locate and
record (photographically at the very least) those resources
appearing on the maps and in site record files, or note a
lack of physical remains. This will necessitate travel
beyond that required for the specific project at hand, but
the cost and time will be less than if investigators made
a special trip from Battle Mountain or Tonopah for the
purpose.
(2) Without the services of a qualified professional in
history/architectural history, the BLM must rely on existing
personnel to collect physical data about historic resources.
Such reliance invariably results in production of information
that varies in both quantity and quality. One way to miti-
gate this situation is development of field inventory forms
that, while not guaranteed to produce the desired informa-
tion, would certainly encourage the collection of more, and
more pertinent, data than appears to be the case with BLM's
current forms. Forms NSO-6230-2 and NSO-6230-5 (March and
April, 1976, respectively) are simply inadequate for record-
ing standing structures or complexes. Form N6-811-2
(January 1978) is an improvement, because it provides
adequate space for a physical description, statement of
significance, and references. However, this form relies
heavily on the ability of the individual completing it to
observe and record pertinent characteristics of the
resource. While archaeologists are trained to identify
important elements of an archaeological site, they do not
necessarily have (nor should they be expected to have) the
knowledge required to do the same for historic structures
(as would be the case with an historian or architectural
historian confronted with a rock shelter or lithic scatter) .
Therefore, the best form for recording structures is one
that asks specific questions and provides a range of
possible answers, thus ensuring a measure of consistency
in the data. In Appendix B are sample historic structures
inventory forms from Maryland, North Carolina, Iowa and
Connecticut. Although they vary according to the needs of
each state, these samples all direct the recorder to
specific aspects of a building or structure, asking
questions that can be answered swiftly through simple
observation.
Inventory forms similar to these could be developed
for the BLM Battle Mountain District that would take into
account the fact that the majority of the District's
historic/architectural resources derive from agricultural
and mining activities. Appendix C offers a possible format
for inventory of these kinds of resources. Ideally, a
116
manual of instructions for completing forms should be
developed. An interim step, however, would be to compile
a slide presentation for BLM people likely to "be involved
in field work, that would point out the various features
discussed on the forms. These forms could also be used by
members of the public who wish to bring various historic
resources to BLM attention.
(3) The BLM should continue efforts to computerize cultural
resource data. Computerization should significantly facili-
tate management of site records, and would make data more
immediately accessible. The file would be easy to update
and correct, and the computer's sorting capability would
allow use and examination of data to meet a variety of
needs and circumstances.
Probably the most difficult task in computerizing
cultural resource information, as Roberta McGonagle has
pointed out (Personal communication from R. L. McGonagle,
July, I98O), is determining how data will be used, and then
deciding on the kinds of data to be included in the file.
These are not easy decisions, whether the issue is compu-
terization or simply designing site forms for manual
storage and retrieval. The problem is perhaps most
intractable with regard to prehistoric cultural resources,
which, to much greater extent than in historical research,
function as the "primary," and often only, source of
information on past cultures and lif eways . The situation
is further complicated, as McGonagle has again noted, by
the fact that data needed by cultural resource managers
may be different from data desired by academicians or even
private consultants. Yet all three groups are actively
working in the region, often to very different ends
(Personal communication from R. L. McGonagle, September,
1980).
However, priority should be given to facilitating the
work of cultural resource management since without proper
management there will be few cultural resources left for
historians, archaeologists, or architectural historians to
study in the future. The first goal of data collection
(with or without intent to computerize) should therefore
be to obtain that "core" of information most needed for
cultural resource management. As long as this "core" is
in place, other kinds of data can be collected as desired
by various investigators, academic or consultant. If data
are computerized, it is possible to use either packaged or
specifically designed "software" that would permit addition
of data beyond the management core in the future . This
117
could be done by leaving space sufficient to add variables
in the original softward design, or by "translating" to
expand the file. If it hasn't done so already, BLM-Battle
Mountain should consult others who have developed computerized
cultural resource systems. For example, the Montana state
office of BLM has published a Cultural Resources Automatic
Data Processing System Guidebook (1978). This ADP System has
been designed as a cultural resources management tool, with
emphasis on inventory and evaluation. While perhaps not
directly translatable to the needs of BLM in Nevada, the ADP
system certainly offers a model for consideration.
(*0 Public interest in cultural resources might be generated
through development of a pamphlet series, each number
featuring a particular site, subject, or report of activities
and findings of a survey. If this could not be managed by
one district alone, perhaps the BLM districts throughout
Nevada could develop the series jointly. Possible topics
are horsetraps, stage stations, a ranch such as Cloverdale
that has many associations with the region's history, a
mining district, the forms and materials of rural architec-
ture. The pamphlets could also, in the course of presenting
historical information, discuss laws and regulations governing
cultural resources, how they work and why they exist.
Presenting the role of the BLM in the form of a case study
focusing on a particular resource or survey might help the
public better understand the reasons for, and intricacies
of, federal participation in cultural resource management
and protection.
Other possibilities include a newsletter and photo
exhibits or slide/tape presentations, the latter perhaps
made available to community groups or schools. Newspapers
are often interested in articles about local history or
historic sites; features editors should be contacted in this
regard. BLM personnel might also arrange to give illustrated
talks, again for community groups or school classes, that
would combine information about the land and its natural and
cultural resources with the work of the Bureau itself.
Concerning cultural resource survey as a whole, in the
Battle Mountain District, and in Nevada generally, one of
the most serious shortcomings has been lack of a comprehen-
sive framework, or research design, within which to conduct
specific inventory and evaluation projects. Lack of such a
research design has meant that contextual issues often go
unaddressed; yet it is only with development of an appro-
priate context that individual resources or groups of
resources can be properly evaluated and interpreted.
118
Although efforts to develop research designs for
Nevada prehistory are currently in progress, under the
coordination of Dr. Margaret Lyneis of the University of
Nevada, Las Vegas, this program is largely limited to
consideration of prehistoric archaeology. The investigators
propose to treat historic archaeology only in a "preliminary"
fashion, and other kinds of historic and architectural
resources not at all. From a practical point of view, this
exclusion is probably wise, in that the current project could
become quite unwieldy and perhaps collapse under its own
weight. Far better would be a concurrent program to establish
research designs for Nevada history and architecture, with
participants drawn from the scholarly community, appropriate
state and federal agencies, and also including interested
members of the public at large, such as informed community
representatives or members of local historical groups. Just
as "study units" will be identified for Nevada prehistory,
study units appropriate to Nevada history (including
archaeology) and architecture can be developed. A good
example for consideration is Cultural Resources in
Massachusetts: A Model for Management (Massachusetts
Historical Commission, 1979).
At the present time, however, there do not seem to be
any serious plans to develop research designs for further
study of historic/architectural resources in Nevada, yet the
responsibility of the BLM-Battle Mountain District for such
resources continues and must be met, one way or another.
While it is well beyond the scope of this Class I Inventory
to establish comprehensive research designs for the
District's history and architecture, it has been possible
to develop a framework that could serve as an interim
approach. This framework is based upon major themes identi-
fied in the course of this study as of particular importance
in the historical development of central Nevada. It is
presented in Appendix D as a series of thematically-derived
strategies for use in planning future surveys, and for use
as basic reference points for examination and interpretation
of historic/architectural resources encountered in the field.
The sections include notes on time period, appropriate
geographical scope for study, and kinds of resources asso-
ciated with each theme. Also included are research questions
to be asked, and if possible, answered, in the course of
investigating each theme.
In presenting the results of an historical or archi-
tectural survey, whether for information, National Register
nominations or Determinations of Eligibility, a description
of the survey should accompany the list of potentially
eligible resources. The selected resources should be clearly
119
placed in historic context, and the presentation should
include at least a general discussion of all resources
identified during the survey, their kinds and numbers, and
why some were selected for nomination over others. Further-
more, all eligible resources identified through the survey
should be included in a request for a Determination of
Eligibility or other planning document, regardless of
ownership or jurisdiction. (Nominations to the National
Register should also be prepared to include all eligible
resources, through preparation of historic district,
thematic, or multiple-resource nominations, although this
effort will be complicated by recent legislation pertaining
to nomination of privately-owned properties.) Inclusion of
all resources holds whether the survey is concerned with
way stations, a mining district or districts, horsetraps,
log architecture or settlement. This inclusion also pre-
supposes that historic/architectural surveys in central
Nevada are conducted to fully cover all potentially eligible
resources, rather than those located only on BLM or Forest
Service lands. In fact, it is strongly urged that BLM
identify those survey topics which would involve a joint
effort on the part of these two agencies, and make a con-
certed effort to develop a program to carry them out.
It is recognized, however, that the BLM will need to
address the future of many historic/architectural resources
long before time and money are available for surveys. This
is, in fact, a major failing of the Federal government's
entire program for "protection and enhancement of cultural
resources." Neither federal agencies nor SHFO's have been
given adequate time, money or personnel to identify, much
less evaluate, cultural resources as part of the overall
planning process. The results have been unrecorded loss of
many significant resources, protection of others that do not
deserve it, and public controversy. This situation is not
likely to improve, for BLM or anyone else, in the near
future .
In the meantime, however, BLM can make constructive
use of the information already at its disposal by:
-Using the historical narrative and survey recommendation
portions of this overview to place historic/architectural
resources in context. The context for each resource
should be described on inventory forms as an integral
part of the recording process;
-Using the historic township survey maps, aerial photos
and topographic maps to predict location, density and
in some instances types, of historic resources in a
proposed project area;
120
■Establishing priorities for surveys, based on the
location and nature of projects proposed for the
region;
■Developing a research design based upon one or more of
the strategies suggested in this report, that will best
fit the types of resources expected to exist in the
area of a proposed project. If the actual survey is
conducted by an outside contractor, BLM should see to
it that the research design is carried out to specifi-
cations, by that contractor.
-Organizing existing site data according to survey
topics, and studying these to determine the extent (or
lack thereof) of existing data and also the kind and
amount of data needed to complete a survey and make
evaluations. Then bend every opportunity, BLM's or
other investigators ' , toward gathering the data that
will complete the survey.
121
APPENDIX A
Capsule Histories of Mining Districts and
Mineral Occurrences within the Bureau of
Land Management Battle Mountain (Nevada)
District; with notes on production
Note:
Production figures listed as "Total Production" are
from Couch and Carpenter (19^3) • if "No recorded production"
is listed it means that Couch and Carpenter record no
production. Often these production figures will differ from
those listed in other sources and quoted in the sketches.
There are several reasons for the apparent contradictions.
First, the statistics on which Couch and Carpenter relied
were collected for tax purposes by the counties. The pro-
visions of the tax laws excluded certain types of ore as
well as ore below a certain value per ton. Second, enforce-
ment of tax laws was probably lax, especially in remote
districts, and in those districts where a great deal of
leasing was going on. Finally, it was possible, and common,
to cheat in reporting bullion production. Thus, the figures
Couch and Carpenter list are probably low. On the other hand
many other sources of production figures may not be totally
accurate. Angel's History of Nevada (1881) was in part a
grand promotional piece and inflated production figures were
part of the show. No attempt here has been made to sort out
discrepancies where they occur.
Alpha District (Silver, Lead) Eureka County (18)
Very little is known about the early history of this
district. Some production apparently occurred in 1909, 1912,
and 1917 (Roberts 1967:65) but this does not appear in Couch
and Carpenter (194-3). Lincoln (1923) mentions that a ten-
stamp concentrator was built 3 miles west of the prospects,
but it did not prove a success.
No recorded production.
Antelope District (Zinc, Lead, Silver) Eureka County (22)
This district was discovered shortly after Eureka,
twenty miles south, and was heavily prospected without sig-
nificant results (Angel 1881:4-28; Roberts 1967:65).
Total Production: $87,380
122
-p
-p
P
p
o
o
o
O
>H
•H P
P
•1-1
p
•H
Si
P
Si o
-p
P
c
Si
o
-p
P
Si
p
-p
o
CD -P -H
a
a
•1-1
p
0) -P P
•H
o
o
p
P
o
CQ
>H
C P CO Si
•H
•H CD
Jh
CO
coo
.p
Jj
•H
•H
o
CQ
•H
•H
h
•H O -H P
Si
u c
p
•<H
• H -H »H
O
P
Sh
Si
■H
•H
Si
Q
P
03
S-HC 01
P
-p .h
CO
^
2 Si Si
•H
CQ
4J
P
Si
Q
p
M
CD
Si »H
ga
CO 2
p
■H JJ
P P
U
•H
CQ
CQ
^>
-P
CQ
03 C
■H
Si
C P b£)Q
•H
■H
a
Q o
^d
CO CQ CO
P
Q
>H
■H
CQ
5
o
•H
CD —H
'
<
O CO C 0)
a
cz a;
■H
•H
CD
C5jO«H -H
CO
a
Q
•H
O
.—
Q
Si 03
>,.^ -H CD c
3
f-i
<D Li
CD
C Q Q
•H CD
C
Q
Si
SU
< +»
^
P
C Q Si rH -H
—
C r-f
—
C P
Si
•H
a c
CD
T3
Xi
Si
P
5
C
CD
CD
03 &CBI
03
O CQ
m
O CO
o
Si £ T3
■H
i—l
03
—
CD
<
CQ
O
CD 3
CD
CD
O "^ 00 T3
P
_5
■H
•H> «H
£3, o3 S-<
£ 2
CD
CD
.13
i — 1
.— ■
33
a, o
Si
Si
C Si c
■P
S-. Si
a
c a
5
00 ft o
03
.c
£
"— ]
i— 1
c
—
Si
O 2
o
4-9
CD O ^ CLJ O
os
0) 0)
<c
o
03 ^
a, o
<u
5
5
— 1
CD
CD
JJ
CO
!D EO>+ J
^z
> -p
o
>irH
e c ^
o .o
1—1
O
03
CD
T3
c
>
CD
—
bfl
Si rH 03 O rH
c
H 7]
32
C OH
Si C -H
C £
l—l
f-i
H
>
i— 1
CD
i-H
• C
n
c
O Q) i—i r- 1 O
a3
■H 03
>, 03 S-
•H
CD 03 f-t
O 3
cd
Si
i— i
CD
O
—
•H
P O
•H
o
xfflffloo
2
cou^
MEhSSSO
E-< n
m
<
wxcw
00
2 ch"
-I_
H
O- 00 ON O i—l CM P^-H/ VTNvO O- CO On O rH CM rN-H- VAMD C^CO On O rH CM C^-rH
v\ xo vr>i\o vo \o m: \o vo ^o ^o \o ^o c^c^c^cN-c^c^CN-CN-c^c^cococoaoao
p -p
o o
■H -H
-P -P Si Si
O OCQPP P P P
•H P-HtuDO O OC00303P CQ
Si O Si C -H P >H .H -H CD CD O P P "H
+3 .h -P -H Si O-PSiCD -P Si Q Si Si -H o O C Q
CQ -P SiCOSi P «H O P C O P < < Si -H -H O P
.HCDO -P -H & CO "^ Si -H CO -H -HPCQT3 PSiSi >> CPO
QC-H CQQOO •-^OPSi-iH2+ j SiO-hC^C:c0P , PPC -HO«H
•H Si CD «H Q-HCQPQ OP'HQoSoSO-MCOCQOCd OS'HSi
SjS^ CQ^-H Si-ncQ CD-hcqSi H 0) >iQ-h.h'.Hu +^SiP
CD C0-H CDC CPQ.HCSSi.H-PSiSiCUC QQSi CPCO
>^-^2^0X -^CQ QOrHPQCQCDCD Oji-t -PC 3 CO •-<
•rHCDQ CDSi PCO-HC PCQC0 -h > fi J) rj H (1) >)t|] O f O-H Q
era) -Pa>oS-ioa3GOCia£i -h -p q .h e !fl -HrHcd.HMo2Q
SiojCSi cD-Hffi poccqp 2S3«"*cr:'-i'HQs-i"^ co
CDo-^^O-CoSi CCQCO-^03 OC £ TJ O -H A CDS-T^>iC
co cdsi oCPT:cDtjO^:x:-H.rirHOCPo3+ J t:>SiP | iHPCcDCD
CD >jSi 3 CU)Si CD CQr-i a,C O 3J T3 T3 H -H .H Si Si rH rH C-HP«h CO 2 U JZ
CD Si 3 o3 -H -n O.-^ CCQ-^0303 CO-^C 3 O [J >H O 0303 CDCD-^OOP
a:QWjct!ffl n Qc;<^ , -,3HHS3^2:a,scjCi 4 ^^CQ:s<
ONOHCjnj-^ \o C^-CO ON O <- \ CM C°\^- xr\\0 C^CO ON O i—l CM C-\ -^- u-\\0
p
o
-P
•H
O
Si
•H
03
P
Si
CD
CQ
P
Si
P
P
•H
CQ
<
o
O
Q
■H
03
P -H
•H
p
-P
Q
CD P
CO P
03
CD
CD
P
-p
O Si
Si
CD O
P
c O
Si O
CD
tuO o
P CD P
C
c
O
o
•H P
J_5
C kH
CD O
• n .H
^P 1
< -P
c
p
C CD -H
O Si O
■H
03
p —i
• H
>H
Si CO
CQ
•H Si
C 'H
03 Si
CD O
Si
•H
o
•H C Si
•H < -H
2
CD
o 2
Li
Si
J-> .-1
.rl
2 -P
•H Si
P P
r-l .H
CQ -P
S
•H
Sh-hP
Si Si
Si
•H
—9
-^
co a
-1
CQ
2 ^
C CO
H Si
iiO CQ
Sh
S3, 2 CQ
-u CD P
CD
<
Si c
CO
CQ
>r1
C -H
CQ
3 -H
03 P
C -H
Jd
^J
:o •- i
CO rH CQ
33
CD
P CD
■H
•H
33 CD
T3
O 33
CD -i
O Q
> CQ
.-i Q
Q
CQ
CD Q
•i-i txOP
Si
C
~
CQ rH
—
33
CQ
O
>i
CD 33
2
■H
U
•H
c c
Q fj O
O
ttH
Si
— rH
CD Si
C
c co
S^
03
o c
3i Cj
OS
',
•HOC
M
—
s
•H
-<
CQ
■o
33 C
3
03 CO
E- £
CD P
rH
00 c
ai-J O
>^ SI
—
p
C
O 5E
CQ
C_5 03
C3
rH C
03 CO
J-3
CD
>)H
CD Js! CD
CD
O
M
03 >5
Si
o
—j
3
Pi
C ^
P CD
C« .H
£ i— i
P
c
C >>r-l
CQ O P
-^
+3
O
c <=
CD
£
CD TD
CD
03
CD O
-P bjO^ 5
Si i-i
•H
- >
23 CD i— 1
Si 03 i-i
•H
c
cd
a £
a
-
P rH
>
5 5
i) C
03 Si
2 CD
03 -H
J
o
O Si 33
CD — ' O
~
•<-1
^-i
r— 4 afH
o
•h
C -H
03
O CD
Si .*
33 <
03 J
3 =3
s
s:
2 C3 03
'*-. 03 o
3
—
PQ
< ^
—
< 3
_v-
M 2
C3 CO
rH CM C^^" '-TNNO O-CO ON O rH CM C^N^- VN\C >- 00 ON C — i 3 J r^-C- '-PWC C^-30
rHr-Jr-irHr^,— )r-irHi— li— iCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCM
A Mineral Occurrences
CZD Mining Districts
Map S : Mining Districts and Mineral Occurrences, BLM-Battle Mountain District, 1862-1940
123
Argenta District (Barite) Lander County (2)
Silver was discovered in the area in 1867 and a small
town — Argenta — sprang up. The town was abandoned in 1870
when Battle Mountain was established. There is no recorded
silver production for the district. Barite mining began in
1930 (Stager 1977:62) .
Total Production: Over $3,000,000 in barite, 1930-1969
Arrowhead District (Silver, Gold) Nye County (75)
This district was probably discovered in the early
twentieth century. Lincoln (1923:158) mentioned that two
mining companies were then active in the district doing
development work. Only recorded production is for the years
1920 and 1939.
Total Production: $^,755
Aspen District Lander County (37)
Little is known about this district. It was probably
discovered in the early 1900' s.
No recorded production
Athens District (Silver, Gold) Nye County (5^)
The Athens District was probably discovered in the
early 1900's, but nothing is known about its early history.
Lincoln (1923:159) reported that the Warrior Gold Mining
Company mine produced $20,000 in gold bullion and that two
companies were then developing mines. Recorded production
from the district is from the late 1930's.
Total Production: $53,319 (1935-19^0)
124
Battle Mountain District (Silver, Lander County (1)
Gold, Copper, Antimony)
The Battle Mountain District was organized in 1866 but
was probably discovered several years earlier. By 1870, 32
mines and two smelters were in operation; but the mines were
not noted for outstanding production, and by 1883 production
in the district ceased. In 1897 the Glasgow and Western
Mining Company acquired many of the mines in Copper Canyon
and Copper Basin and began development on copper deposits
with production beginning in 1910. Glasgow's efforts proved
unsuccessful and the properties changed hands many times in
the following decades. In 1967 the Duval Corporation
acquired the properties and developed the Battle Mountain
mine.
Placer gold was discovered in the district in 1909i with
sporadic placer activity occurring over the next forty years.
The majority of the drift mines were located in Copper Canyon
and several hydraulic monitors worked the placers of Copper
Basin in 1912-1913.
In 19^7 the dredge working the placers of Manhatten
Gulch (Nye County) was moved to the fan at the mouth of
Copper Canyon. Between 19^-7 and 1955 the dredge recovered
over 100,000 ounces of gold (Lincoln 1923:106-107; Johnson
1973:87; Stager 1977:66; Welch 1979:18-19).
Total Production: $^+,825,080 to 19^0
Bellehelen District (Silver, Gold) Nye County (7^)
Nothing is known about the early history of this
district. Church (1923:159-160) reported that the Bellehelen
Merger Mines Company was building a 50 ton per day cyanide
mill in the district. The mill only ran a few months in
1923. was rehabilitated in 1927 and ran a short time (Krai
1951:17-19). The only recorded production was in 1918.
Total Production: $29,^73
125
Belmont District (Silver, Gold) Nye County (58)
The Belmont district was discovered in 1865 and was
rapidly organized. Belmont was a prosperous camp, becoming
the Nye county seat in 1867 . In 1866 the first mill in the
district was built, with ten stamps. The next year a twenty
stamp mill was built, and in 1868 a forty stamp mill began
operations. The first mill ceased operations in 1869 • The
second suspended operations in 1868, resuming operations in
I878 for only a few months. The forty-stamp mill ceased
operations in I876. The mines themselves were active until
1891 although only 12 tons of ore, worth $2,4-23, were mined
that year. The mines were quite wet.
The twentieth century saw several attempts to revive
the district through consolidation and introduction of new
milling technologies. All were short lived (Angel 1881:519-
522; Lincoln 1923: 160) .
Total Production: $3,790,518
Big Creek District (Antimony) Lander County (33)
The Bray Mine was originally located in 1864- as a silver
mine; but neither it nor any of the other claims in the
district were ever developed. The Bray Mine was relocated
in 1891 and was worked intermittently until I898. The Pine
Mine, north of Big Creek, shipped some antimony ore in I890.
Lincoln (1923:109) reported that mining had resumed in 1916
and 1917. Production has been sporadic since (Stager 1977:
71).
No recorded production.
Birch Creek (Gold, Silver) Lander County (34)
The district was discovered in 1863 and the camp of
Geneva formed. Clinton, established a year later, became
the major town for the district. In I865 Clinton boasted
a sawmill and a four-stamp mill, "... reported to be
incapable of reducing anything but the hopes of [the] miners
who shipped their ores to it for treatment. " In 1866 a
twenty stamp mill was erected, but it shortly shut down for
lack of ore. By the end of I867 the camps were deserted;
the mines closed.
Intermittent activity was reported in the district
1910-1912, 1919, and during the '40's and ' 50's. A small
amount of uranium ore was mined 1955-1960 (Lincoln 1923:
109-110; Angel 1881:472-473; Stager 1977:72).
No recorded production.
126
Blackbird area (Manganese)
No further information.
Lander County (17)
Black Eagle area (Manganese)
No further information.
Lander County (13)
Black Spring District (Diatomaceous
Earth)
Nye County (59)
Lincoln (1923:161) reported that Nature Products
Company was mining diatomaceous earth in the district. It
was used as the basis for "Superdent Tooth Powder" and
"Super Dental Cream."
No recorded production.
Buffalo Valley District (Gold,
Silver, Manganese)
Lander County (3)
The district was discovered in 1866 or 1867 » Nineteenth
century mining activity was limited to some placering and to
a small quantity (10 tons) of ore shipped in 1870. Between
1925 and 19^1 Buffalo Valley Mines sporadically operated a
10 ton per day cyanide mill. Manganese was mined between
19^2-47 and 1950-5^ (Stager 1977:7^).
No recorded production.
Bullion District (Silver, Gold, Lead,
Copper, Arsenic, Turquoise)
Lander County (11)
The early history of the district is uncertain.
Lincoln (1923:110) lists Lander as the oldest camp in the
district and the milling center for the district in the
1870's and ' 80's. Gold was discovered in 1907 around Tenabo
and a minor rush occurred. By 1912 both Tenabo and the
district had begun their inevitable decline. The Gold Acres
mine started operations in 1935 • In 19^+2 the mine was open
pitted and operated until I96I. The Bullion District is also
noted for its turquoise (Stager 1977:75).
Total Production: $^50,369
127
Clifford District (Silver, Gold) Nye County (71)
The district was discovered in 1906 and supported a
town of 500 a year later. Krai (1951:42-43) estimates the
production of the district at less than $500,000.
No recorded production.
Cloverdale District (Silver, Gold, Nye County (60)
Lead, Copper)
Lincoln (1923 5 165) reported that the district was being
explored and developed in 1905. Production began in 1906
and continued until 1919. Some placer gold has been
recovered in the district. The mines have been sporadically
worked since 1920 (Krai 1951:44).
No recorded production.
Colton Mine (Fluorspar) Nye County (61)
Also known as the Western Fluorspar Mine or the
Cottonwood Canyon Mine. No dates or production figures
(Horton 1961:17) .
Cortez District (Silver, Gold, Lander and Eureka
Lead, Zinc) Counties (14)
Prospectors from Austin discovered the Cortez district
in I863. An eight-stamp mill with roasters and pans was
erected in Mill Canyon in 1864, later enlarged to sixteen
stamps. Rich ore was discovered in the Garrison mine in
1868 and the Garrison became the principal mine in the
district. Ore was milled at Mill Canyon until a new mill,
a leaching plant, was built at Cortez in 1886. Water for
the mill had to be piped seven miles.
After the death of Simeon Wenban, the district's largest
owner, in 1895 1 most of the properties were worked by leasers
In 1908 a cyanide mill was built to work the Cortez mill
tailings. In 1919 the Consolidated Cortez Silver Mines
Company gained control of the major properties in the
district. They built a 100 ton per day concentration and
cyanide mill in 1923i enlarging it in 1927. The Consoli-
dated's mill closed in 1930 and production in the district
has been sporadic since (Lincoln 1923:86; Roberts 1967:
69-72).
Total Production: $6,375i839
128
Danville District (Silver, Gold) Nye County (50)
The district was discovered in 1866 and reorganized in
1870. Some production is recorded for the early 1870's.
By 1880 the district was dormant. In 1944-45 a small amount
of development work and production took place (Angel 1881:
516-517; Lincoln 1923:166; Krai 1951:53).
Total Production: $4,747
Diamond District (Silver, Lead, Eureka County (21)
Zinc, Gold)
The district was located and organized in 1864 but
little was done in the district until two years later, when
several tons of ore were taken to Austin. A smelter was
built in the district in 1873 and a small amount of bullion
was produced. Some development work was reported by Lincoln
(Angel 1881:429; Lincoln 1923:87).
Total Production: $29i881
Dry Creek Mine (Turquoise) Lander County (30)
Discovered in 1932, this mine has produced more than
$400,000 in gem quality turquoise (Morrissey 1968:21-22).
No recorded production.
Easter Blue Mine (Turquoise) Nye County (64)
This turquoise mine has been worked intermittently
since its discovery in 1907.
No recorded production.
Eden District (Silver, Gold) Nye County (79)
The Eden District was discovered in 1905 but never
amounted to much. A thirty-five ton mill was built in 1938
but this only worked sporadically (Lincoln 1923:166; Krai
1951:53).
No recorded production
129
Ellendale District (Gold, Silver) Nye County (76)
High-grade gold ore was discovered in 1909 > and the
district flourished until 1916. Most of the work during
this period was done by leasers. Some work was done during
the late 1930's (Krai 1951:54-57; Koschmann 1968:192;
Lincoln 1923:167) .
Total Production: $77,612
Eureka District (Lead, Silver, Eureka County (31)
Gold, Zinc)
The Eureka District contained the first important lead-
silver mines in the United States. Although the district
was discovered in 1864, no significant activity occurred
until 1870 after Major McCoy built a smelter that could suc-
cessfully treat Eureka's lead silver ores. Between 1870 and
1885. the Eureka district produced over $40 million in lead,
silver and gold. The two major smelters in the district
shut down in 1890 and 1891 after the amount of ore produced
by leasers became insufficient to warrant operations.
A revival began in 1905 with the merger of the Eureka
Consolidated Mining Company and the Richmond Consolidated
Mining Company. The revival was cut short in 1910 when the
Eureka -Palisade Railroad was washed out. In the 1940's and
1950's several companies attempted to redevelop the Eureka
mines. Although small quantities of ore were discovered and
mined, these efforts were not a commercial success (Angel
1881:428-435; Lincoln 1923:88-89; Nolan 1962:2-3).
Total Production: $52,288,024
Fairplay District (Gold Silver) Nye County (51)
"The Fairplay District was discovered in 1905 and made
small annual productions up to 1911. Two properties pro-
duced in 1920" (Lincoln 1923:167).
No recorded production.
Fish Creek District (Lead, Silver, Eureka County (83)
Gold)
Discovered in the late 1870's, the Fish Creek District
never produced significantly. Roberts (1967:85-90) says that
the only production occurred in 1938 and 1955-
No recorded production.
L30
Gold Basin District (Gold, Silver) Lander County (36)
The discovery of gold in the area in 1911 lead to a
small rush to the district. The town of Carroll was
established and production is recorded for 1912. The
district was not as rich as hoped and it was quickly
abandoned.
Total Production: $7,226
Gold Hill District (Gold) Nye County (^9)
The early history of the district is unknown. Some
gold was recovered in 1931-32 but the district has been
dormant since (Koschmann 1968:192).
No recorded production.
Golden Arrow District (Gold, Silver) Nye County (78)
The district was discovered in 1905 • Production from
the area has been small (Lincoln 1923:169).
No recorded production.
Green Tree mine (Turquoise) Lander County (27)
Discovered in 1937. Production unknown (Morrissey
1968:21).
No recorded production.
Greys tone Mine (Barite) Lander County (10)
No information.
No recorded production.
Hannapah District (Silver, Gold) Nye County (70)
The Hannapah mine was discovered in 1902 and the
district was prospected for several years. Some ore was
shipped from the district in 191^ and 1922.
Total Production: $1^6 (1871?)
131
Hilltop District (Gold, Silver, Lander County (6)
Copper, Lead)
The district was discovered in 1906 and a minor boom
occurred two years later. A ten-stamp amalgamation mill was
built in 1912, and later changed to a cyanide mill. In
1922 a 100 ton per day flotation mill was built but it only
ran a few months before being scrapped (Lincoln 1923s 111;
Stager 1977:80). Some mining occurred in the mid and late
1930's.
Tota Production: $4-2^,669
Horse Canyon Mine (Mercury) Nye County (57)
The Horse Canyon mine is located in an unnamed
district along with several other prospects. The mine was
discovered in 1937 and some production occurred from small
mercury retorts prior to 19^2. A twenty-ton furnace was
set up in 19^2 and ran sporadically for two years (Bailey
19^:155-156) .
No recorded production.
Indian Blue Mine (Turquoise) Nye County (^1)
This mine may have been worked by the Indians of the
region in prehistoric times. The mine was discovered and
worked by Anglo-Americans in 1925 (Morrissey 1968:2^).
No recorded production.
Iowa Canyon Mine (Fluorspar) Lander County (25)
A small prospect. No further information (Horton
1961:12) .
No recorded production.
132
Jackson District (Gold, Silver) Lander and Nye
Counties (39)
The district was discovered in 1880. In 1893 three
claims and a mill site were patented and sold to the
Nevada Mining Company. This company erected a mill and
"operated for quite a period." In 1921 the Nevada Mining
Company property was reorganized as the Star of the West
Mining Company. They built a 50 ton per day mill which
made a trial run only. The properties of the district were
worked sporadically in the 1930's and 19 z +0's (Lincoln 1923:
170-171; Krai 1951:77) .
Total production: $3,061
Jefferson Canyon District (Gold, Nye County (53)
Silver)
The district was located in 1866 but there was little
interest in it until a test lot of ore, sent to Austin in
1871 for milling, yielded $28,800. Two ten-stamp mills were
erected in 187^ "by the two major mines in the district. By
1877 the district was in decline. A third mill was built
sometime before World War I. It was reconstructed in 1917
and ran briefly in 1918 and 1927.
Total Production $506,5^5
Jersey District (Silver, Lead, Lander County (12)
Mercury)
The Jersey District was discovered in 187^. A year
later 500 tons of ore were shipped to Oreana, Nevada for
smelting. A small smelting furnace was built in the district
but was unsuccessful due to lack of flux. Considerable ore
was shipped from the district between 1880 and 1910. In
1919 and 1920 some mercury was produced from a small retort
furnace in the district (Angel 1881:^74; Lincoln 1923:207).
Total Production: $28,466
Jett District (Silver, Lead, Zinc) Nye County (52)
The district was discovered in I876 and became active
in 1880. Some ore was shipped to Eureka for smelting
(Lincoln 1923:172) .
No recorded production.
133
Jimmy Allen Mine (Turquoise) Lander County (19)
This mine was discovered in 1933 from float on the
surface down slope from the veins (Morrissey 1968:20).
No recorded production.
Jumbo Mine (Barite) Nye County (73)
No information.
No recorded production.
Kingston District (Gold, Silver) Lander County (38)
There has been sporadic activity here since the early
1860's. In 1875 there were four mills in the district; how-
ever, none of them ran more than sporadically due to poor
ore. A sixty stamp mill operated intermittently after 1909
(Angel 1881:472, ^73. W ; Lincoln 1923:112).
Total Production: $18,726
Laurent Mine (Barite) Lander County (32)
A small barite prospect.
No recorded production.
Lewis District (Silver, Gold, Lander County (4)
Lead, Antimony)
The Lewis District was discovered in 1867 and by 1876
two mills were in operation. In 1880 a branch line of the
Nevada Central Railroad was built up Lewis Canyon. The line
was never able to justify its existence and was finally dis-
mantled in 1890. Gold was discovered in the district in
1882 at what would become the Pittsburg and Morning Star
Mines. The Pittsburg Mine is of interest because ore from
the m'.ne was sent by aerial tram to the mill in the canyon
below. The Pittsburg mill operated until 1892.
Several attempts were made to revive the district in the
twentieth century but all were failures, until Noble Getchell
started up a 100 ton per day flotation mill in 1922. This
mill recovered more than $2 million between 1923 and 1929
(Emmons 1910:122; Lincoln 1923:113; Welch 1979:19-20).
Total Production: $3,188,805
134
Lodi District (Silver, Gold, Lead) Nye County (42)
The Lodi District was first organized in December 1863
as the Mammoth District. A ten-stamp mill was erected in
1871 that treated ore from the Lodi district and
from the Union and Belmont districts as well. The mines
first discovered proved not to be very rich. In 1874,
however, new discoveries were made in the western part of
the district and considerable ore was produced. By 1880,
however, activities in the district had ceased.
A revival of sorts began in 1905 with the rehabilita-
tion of many of the old mines and construction of a small
smelter in 1908. This smelter proved unsuccessful. In 1916
a 30 ton per day cyanide plant reworked the tailings at
Ellsworth. Five years later a rich gold strike was made and
the district produced until 1927 (Angel 1881:523, 525;
Lincoln 1923:174; Krai 1951:93).
Total Production: $809,905
Lone Mountain District (Silver, Eureka County (82)
Lead, Zinc)
Although discovered in 1920, this district was not a
significant producer until 1943. Production between 1943
and 1964 is listed as $781,102 (Roberts 1967:90-92).
No recorded production (up to 1940).
Longs treet area (Gold, Silver) Nye County (84)
Discovered in 1903, the district was a sporadic
producer. A 100 ton per day cyanide mill was built in
1929 (Krai 1951:99-102).
No recorded production.
McCoy
District (Gold, Iron) Lander County (8)
The district was discovered in 1914, but saw little
activity until the discovery of high grade gold ore in 1928,
A 20 ton per day amalgamation mill was built in 1930 to
reduce the ore. By the close of 1932 the district was on
the decline.
The district was marginally more successful as an iron
producer. Up to 1954 55,000 tons of ore were hauled to
Battle Mountain for shipment overseas (Shawe 1962:110-116;
Stager 1977:86) .
Total Production: $56,270
135
Manhattan District (Gold, Silver) Nye County (62)
The district was discovered in 1905 and the inevitable
rush occurred. Placer mining began the following year on a
large scale and produced significant amounts of placer gold
until 1915. Vanderburg (1936:126-12?) states that five miles
of Manhattan Gulch were worked by placer drift mines, some
nearly 100 feet deep. Lode mining began in 1908 and discovery
of rich ore on the lower levels of the White Caps mine in
1916 led to another boom. In 191? the Associated Mill,
built in 1912, was reconstructed to include a roasting
furnace.
As in many other districts, the 1930 's saw a revival of
mining in the Manhattan District. This revival was in both
the placer and the hardrock mining portions of the district.
In 1938 a floating dredge began to work gravels in Manhattan
Gulch. Between 1938 and 1946, when it was moved to Battle
Mountain, the dredge recovered 133*000 ounces of gold ($4.5
million) (Koschmann 1968:193; Lincoln 1923:175; Vanderburg
1936:126-127) .
Total Production: $6,999,507
Millett District (Silver, Gold, Nye County (43)
Lead, Copper)
The Millett District, also known as the North Twin River
District, was discovered in I863. The principal mine in the
district, the Buckeye, shipped ore to Austin to be milled.
The district experienced a minor revival in 1905 and small
productions were made from 1906 to 1916. A five stamp mill
operated from 1911 to 1913 (Lincoln 1923:177-178).
No recorded production.
Morey District (Silver, Gold, Lead) Nye County (55)
Ore was first discovered in the area in I865 and the
Morey District was organized in 1866. The town of Morey
was established, and ore shipments to Austin began, in 1869 .
In 1873 a ten-stamp mill was built, but it ceased operations
after one month. Until 1880 ore was shipped to Tybo for
reduction. In April, 1880 the mill started up and ran for
eight months, producing $9,000 worth of bullion per month.
Production in the district continued until 1891 at about the
same small level.
Total Production: $462,972
136
Mt. Hope area (Lead, Zinc) Eureka County (81)
Lead-zinc deposits were discovered here in 1870 by
Basques who ran charcoal furnaces in the area. The Mt.
Hope Mine opened in 1886 and considerable development work
(but little production) was done sporadically through 1940.
A mine and mill, built in 1940, operated until 1947 when a
fire destroyed the powerhouse. Total production 1940-1947:
$1,335,393 (Roberts 1967:103).
No recorded production.
Mountain Springs area (Barite) Lander County (9)
Barite mining began in the area in 1948 (Stager 1977:
87).
No recorded production.
New Pass District (Silver, Manganese) Lander County (26)
The district was discovered in 1865 and a small stamp
mill was moved there from Austin in 1868. The camp and the
district remained mostly idle until 1900 when some activity
in the district resumed. It was shortlived, however, and
the Post Office closed in 1904. The Nevada Austin Mines
Company built a 100 ton per day cyanide mill (date unknown)
but it was unsuccessful. Some intermittent activity
occurred in the 1930's (Lincoln 1923:385; Stager 1977:88).
Total Production: $450
Northumberland District (Gold, Silver) Nye County (46)
The Northumberland District was discovered in 1866. What
happened after that is unclear, as Lincoln and Angel differ
substantially on their dates. Lincoln states that ore was
shipped to Austin until 1868 when a ten stamp mill was built.
The mill ran only a short time and the district was abandoned
by 1870. Angel reports a similar train of events, but with
different dates. According to Angel, the ten stamp mill was
built in 1879, at the same time as the town of Northumberland
was established. Angel reports that the mill ran only three
months and that the town was abandoned by 1881. Couch and
Carpenter (1943) tend to lend more credibility to Angel's
report: in 1879, 275 tons of ore were mined, yielding $7,077
in silver bullion; only 2 tons were mined in 1868 (Angel 1881:
522; Lincoln 1923:178) .
In 1935 low-grade gold ore was discovered in the district
and the Northumberland Mining Company organized. From 1939
until 1942 they recovered $1,146,475 in gold from their open
pit operations (Krai 1951:135).
Total Production: $459,066 (up to 1940)
137
Paradise Peak area (Tungsten, Nye County (47)
Mercury)
No information.
No recorded production.
Pinto Mine (Turquoise) Lander County (16)
Discovered in 1901, the Pinto mine has been a small
producer (Morrissey 1968:19).
No recorded production.
Ravenswood District (Copper, Lead, Lander County (24)
Silver, Gold)
The district was organized in 1863 and worked inter-
mittently thereafter. Angel (1881:475) reported that most
of the claims in the district were abandoned in 1881
(Lincoln 1923:114).
No recorded production.
Reese River District (Silver, Lander County (29)
Gold, Lead, Copper)
The Reese River District was the first major mining
district discovered in central Nevada, and it set off almost
two decades of exploration in the region. The production
history of the district is rather lackluster. Major mining
activity was hindered until 1869 by metallurgical problems
with the ore. In 1865 "the Manhattan Silver Mining Company
began to acquire the major mines and mills in the district,
an effort that was essentially complete by 1877 • The
Manhattan's mill shut down in 1887. An attempt was made to
revive the district in the early 1890's but this failed.
Reese River never measured up to people's hopes for
another Comstock. Total production amounted to less than
$19 million, $16 million of this credited to the Manhattan
Silver Mining Company. The annual production of the
district fluctuated between $500,000 and $1 million between
1865 and 1885 (Lincoln 1923:114-115; Angel 1881:465-469;
Welch 1979:11-18) .
Total Production: $18,494,209
138
Reveille District (Silver, Gold, Nye County (77)
Lead, Copper)
The district was organized in 1866 and was named in
honor of the Reese River Reveille by the original locators.
In 1867 a 5 stamp mill was erected in the district and two
years later a 10 stamp mill was built. Both mills only ran
a short time. In 1875 "the 10 stamp mill was restarted and
ran intermittently for the next several years, producing
$1,500,000 in bullion. In 1880 the district was abandoned.
Interest in the district revived in 1904, but production
since has been irregular (Angel 1881:526; Lincoln 1923:179)
Total Production: $610,982
Roberts District (Silver, Lead, Eureka County (20)
Copper, Zinc)
The district was discovered in 1870. In 1910 a mill
was built but operated only a short time before it was dis-
assembled and moved elsewhere (Lincoln 1923:96; Roberts I967
104) .
No recorded production.
Round Mountain (Gold, Silver, Lead, Nye County (54)
Tungsten)
The Round Mountain District was discovered in 1906 and
lode mining began on several properties, with placers dis-
covered the following year. The Round Mountain Mining
Company was the district's principal producer. They erected
a 150 ton per day mill in 1907 and in 1908 brought water
from Jefferson and Shoshone Canyons for hydraulicking. In
1915 a pipeline was built across the valley to Jett Canyon
for water. The district enjoyed a steady production record
from 1908 until 1919. A revival occurred in the 1930's,
as the price of gold and new placering technologies made it
possible to work gravels ignored in the first twenty years
of the district (Koschmann 1968:193-194; Lincoln 1923:
180-181) .
Total Production: $7,834,828
139
San Antone District (Silver, Gold, Nye County (5*0
Lead, Copper)
The district was discovered in I863. Two years later
a 10 stamp mill was built at San Antonio Station, 12 miles
north of the district. It operated only one year, then was
moved elsewhere. In I867 a h stamp mill was built in the
district which ran for a year. The recorded production is
from this period ($1*12,976).
In the twentieth century several companies have tried
to work properties in the district. The Tonopah Liberty
Mining Company built two mills at the Liberty Mine but both
were unsuccessful (Angel 1881:518; Lincoln 1923:181-182).
Total Production: $1^-2,976
Silverbow District (Silver, Gold) Nye County (80)
The district was discovered in 1905, with the first
ore shipments beginning in 1906. In 1913 a 2 stamp mill was
built. A 20 stamp mill was erected by the Blue Horse Mining
Company in 1920 but it shut down the next year.
No recorded production.
Silverton District (Silver) Nye County (63)
No information.
No recorded production.
Skookum District (Silver, Gold) Lander County (28)
The district was discovered in 1907 and a minor and
shortlived boom took place the next year.
No recorded production.
Spencer Hot Springs District Lander County (35)
(Tungsten)
Tungsten was discovered in the area in 19*f-l and was
mined on a small scale until 1957. The Linka District is
included in this district (Stager 1977:98).
No recorded production.
140
Tonopah District (Silver, Gold, Nye County (72)
Lead, Copper)
The Tonopah District was discovered in 1900 and within
five years had become one of the most important silver-gold
producers in the United States. Initial development was
undertaken largely by leasers because outside investors were
unwilling to gamble on such a remote district. By 1904
Tonopah's spectacular production attracted numerous inves-
tors. In that year a railroad link was completed with the
Southern Pacific Railroad at Sodaville. The first mill in
the district was built at Millers, twelve miles west of
Tonopah on the railroad, in 1906. This was the first of
many mills in the district; by 1915 seven mills with more
than 300 stamps total were reducing ore in Tonopah.
The Tonopah Mining Company and the Tonopah-Belmont Mining
Company, both organized in 1902, accounted for 60% of the
nearly $150 million produced between 1900 and 1940 (Lincoln
1923:184-193) .
Total Production: $146,336,102
Troy District (Silver, Gold) Nye County (6?)
In the late 1860's, an English company purchased mines
in Troy Canyon and built a 20 stamp mill and furnaces. The
mill shut down in 1872, only five years after the district
had been discovered. There was some prospecting of claims
in Irwin Canyon in the early twentieth century but little
was found (Lincoln 1923:193-194).
Total Production: $6,239
Twin River District (Silver) Nye County (45)
A party of Frenchmen discovered the Twin River District
in I863. The district's principal mine, the Murphy Mine,
was discovered the following year. A 20 stamp mill and
furnace was constructed in 1865, to process ore from the
Murphy. The mill ceased operations in 1868 after producing
more than $2 million in bullion. With the suspension of
milMng operations the district was abandoned. Work on the
Murphy was resumed in 1918 through 1923 and some additional
development was done in 1937-1939. Both efforts were with-
out results (Angel 1881:526; Lincoln 1923=194; Krai 1951:
184) .
Total Production: $54,548
141
Tybo District (Silver, Lead, Gold) Nye County (65)
The Hot Creek section of the Tybo district was dis-
covered in 1865 and "by 1868 there were two 10-stamp mills
in operation. The Tybo section of the district was dis-
covered in 1870. In 1874 and 1875 two smelters were built,
their construction bringing prosperity until 1888. In 1917
an attempt was made to rejuvinate the district. A 75 ton
per day concentrator was built, but it ran less than a year.
In 1919 a flotation, plant and smelter were built but these
too were unsuccessful. In 1929 the Treadwell-Yukon C ompany
built a 350 ton per day flotation mill which ran until 1937.
The Treadwell-Yukon operation produced $6,781,000 in silver,
lead and gold (Angel 1881:527; Lincoln 1923:195; Krai
1951:191).
Total Production: $9,570,848
Union District (Mercury, Gold, Nye County (44)
Silver, Lead)
The district was discovered in I863 and the towns of
lone and Grantsville established. Upon petition of miners
in the district, Nye County was separated from Esmeralda
County in 1864, with lone as the new county seat. Two 20
stamp mills were built but the district failed to meet
expectations. Symbolic of this was Ione's loss of the
county seat to Belmont in I867. A revival ensued with
construction of a 20-stamp mill at Grantsville in 1877. The
mill was enlarged in 1880 and ran until 1881. In 1905 a
30-stamp mill was built at the Ber.lin Mine. In 1912 a
cyanide mill was built to treat the tailings from this mine.
Mercury was discovered in the district in 1907 and
from then until 1920 the district produced 11,000 flasks
of the metal (Angel 1881:523; Lincoln 1923:196; Koschmann
1968:195).
Total Production: $3,304,328
Warm Springs area (Mercury) Lander County (5)
Mercury was discovered in the area in 1937 and attempts
were made in 1939-41 and 1955-56 to produce it on a commer-
cial basis. These efforts were not successful and less than
20 flasks of mercury were produced (Stager 1977:97).
No recorded production.
142
Warm Springs mine (Barite) Nye County (69)
A small barite deposit. The mine has produced less
than 1,000 tons (Horton 1963:15).
No recorded production.
Washington District (Silver, Lead) Nye County (^0)
"The Washington District was organized in I863 and
for a few years was a very active camp" (Lincoln 1923:197).
Some development work was done on mines in the district in
1918 and 1919 and again in 19^8; no results have been
reported (Lincoln 1923:197; Krai 1951:207).
Total Production: $^76
White Horse mine (Turquoise) Lander County (15)
A small turquoise prospect (Morrissey 1968:20).
No recorded production.
White Rock mine (Barite) Lander County (7)
No information.
No recorded production.
Wild Horse District (Mercury) Lander County (23)
Cinnabar was discovered in the district in 1916.
Mercury was produced sporadically through i960. Total
production of the district was 1,200 flasks (Bailey 19^:
111-112; Stager 1977:99).
No recorded production.
Willow Creek District (Gold, Silver) Nye County (68)
The district was discovered in 1911 and saw some
production of free gold in 1913 from the Melbourn vein.
Lincoln (1923:198) notes some production in 1913. 191^ and
1917 and that a 5 stamp mill was built in 1921.
Total production: $2,557
143
APPENDIX B
Historic Site Inventory Forms
from Selected States
144
■
MARYLAND HISTORICAL TRUST
SURVEY NUMBER:
21 STATE CIRCLE
SHAW HOUSE
NEGATIVE FILE NUMBER:
ANNAPOLIS, MARYLAND 21401
HISTORIC SITES SURVEY FIELD SHEET
Individual Structure Survey Form
UTM REFERENCES:
Zone /Easting /Nor thing
U.S.G.S. QUAD. MAP:
PRESENT FORMAL NAME:
COUNTY:
ORIGINAL FORMAL NAME:
TOWN :
LOCATION:
PRESENT USE:
ORIGINAL USE:
ARCHITECT/ENGINEER:
COMMON NAME:
BUILDER/CONTRACTOR:
FUNCTIONAL TYPE:
OWNER:
ADDRESS:
PHYSICAL CONDITION OF STRUCTURE:
Excellent ( ) Good ( )
Fair ( ) Poor: ( )
ACCESSIBILITY TO PUBLIC:
Yes( ) No ( ) Restricted ( )
THEME:
STYLE:
LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE:
Local ( ) State ( ) National ( )
DATE BUILT:
GENERAL DESCRIPTION:
Structural System
1. Foundation: Stone( )Brick( )Concrete( )Concrete Block( )
2. Wall Structure
A. Wood Frame: Post and Beam( )Balloon( )
B. Wood Bearing Masonry: Brick( )Stone( )Concrete( )Concrete Block( )
C. Ironf ) D. Steel( ) E. Other:
3. Wall Covering: Clapboard( )Board and Batten( )Wood Shingle( )Shiplap( )
Novelty( )Stucco( )Sheet Metal( )Alurainum( )Asphalt Shingle( )
Brick Veneer( )Stone Veneer( )
Bonding Pattern: Other:
4. Roof Structure
A. Truss: Wood( )Iron( )Steel( )Concrete( )
B. Other:
5. Roof Covering: Slate( )Wood Shingle( )Asphalt Shingle( )Sheet Metal( )
Built Up( )Rolled( )Tile( )0ther:
6. Engineering Structure:
7. Other:
Appendages: Porches( )Towers( )Cupolas( )Dorraers( )Chimneys( )Sheds( )Ells( )
Wings ( )Other:
Roof Style: Gable( )Hip( )Shed( )Flat( )Mansard( )Gambrel( )Jerkinhead( )
Saw Tooth( )WIth Monitor( XJith Bellcast ( )With Parapet( )With False Front( )
Other:
Number of Stories:
Number of Bays:
Entrance Location:
Approximate Dimensions:
THREAT TO STRUCTURE:
No Threat( )Zoning( )Roads( )
Development ( ) Det er iora t ion( )
Alteration ( )Other:
LOCAL ATTITUDES:
Positive( )Negative( )
Mixed( ) Other:
145
ADDITIONAL ARCHITECTURAL OR STRUCTURAL DESCRIPTION:
RELATED STRUCTURES: (Describe)
STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE:
REFERENCES:
MAP: (Indicate North In Circle)
SURROUNDING ENVIRONMENT:
Open Lane( )Woodland( )Scattered Buildings( )
Moderately Built Up( )Densely Built Up( )
ResidentiaK )Commercial( )
Agricultural( )Industrial( )
Roadside Strip Development ( )
Other:
RECORDED BY:
ORGANIZATION:
DATE RECORDED:
146
NORTH CAROLINA HISTORIC STRUCTURES SHORT DATA SHEIT
IIAO and Ufl the Intlructlon minuat is complete ihlt lovm. fill It out •• completely end confidently a. pomole. PUAftl NOTIi net ill vinitlti ire provided fa*
each queauoA and reference to the Instruction menwol will be neco4tery. In all cecal. 0/ 00 denote* in undetermined or net applicable fllponM
• ot W denoiei • variable other than thoie provided, ute the ihu provided
te Indlcele the enawer.
IUIV1T IITI NUMIII (To be ekklgned by S 1 P IratKhl
'• »'H NAMl: I | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | || | I j I I |
159 1*1 170
J. ABBREVIATED LOCATION DESCRIPTION OR STREET ADDRESS, I I I I I I I ' I I I I I | | I | | | | | | |
T5$ Too 53 3io in
i I : I I i I I i I I 1 I I I I I I I I I
314 230 331 3)0 UJ 3a0
4. TOWN/TOWNSHIP/NEAREST COMMUNITY. | | | | |
_J I
TiS 310 3« 2J*
S. COUNTY,
360 3*1
6 OATC RICOROED IN •ItlO, Month
I I I 0.y I I | Veer | | |
T*i 3*i' T*TT*T TSTiT
7. 'iiio recorder.
,0. OWNER NAME, I I I I I I II I I I I I I I I . I i ' I I I I II
3*9 573 3H JH R3 29)
II. OWNER ADORES*, I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
wo jos Tra TTT TiT
I I I I I I I II I I I I I I I I
jjo m 3»o u)
TIT Hi
I). USE, Original Primary I I I I Other.
1*4 TiT
Pietenl Primary | Other.
Til 3SI
••■id/ 'arm leald/Non Perm 'arm tldrj/lndoo el leald School Ottlce lank Gen'l liml Siore Industrial Oevl Olflce Church Mu.ew,
0101 0103 0301 0301 CU0I 0*0) 0501 0601-0414 000) 1001 1701
Cam., err ilia Aben, Unocc Mobile Home Adlee PHA Honi Adlac Oihar Occ Struct Adlaa
1101 3001 3003 3003 3004
IS. CONDITION, Eacellonf Good Pair Deteriorated Ruin Una.oo.cd
I 3 3 4 I *
It. THREATS TO STRUCTURE, I [ Other,
None/Proo Jubla Abuelve » »m Nealeci/Oeierioreilon/ Vandalism lead Con., ruction Impoundment! Private Oev I Urban Oav't Oevl Activity
I 3 1 4 3*71
AtCMITICTU«AL DATA
21. STYLE DEVELOPMENT, Eateries', | | Interior, | j
3*9 370
H,gh/Acsdemlc Sid Popular Simple Vernac/Polk Culture Vlg Vernacular
I 1 3 4
23. GENERAL Smi GROUPS, Eaterler, Plret J Second I I Interior, Plr.t I | | Second j [
J7J 174 37J 376 379 310 311 31]
Cm Geo/Ped 'ad Ped/Gk Rev Gk lew llallanale Ooih Rev It/30 c Plain/Trad
01 0] 03 04 OS 0* 07 Of
Q. Anna NeruClaes lev Cel lav Mile -Vict Std Commercial lungalow Coaalal Plain Collage
II 13 II IS 14 5l 33
24. PLAN (Primary Oomattk Bulldlngt), I Other
3*1 3le
One loom Hall 1 Parlor Quaker 3 loom S.J. Mall Central Hall Cant Hall - Quaker Var Trlparllla Irregular T Hall
01 01 04 0* 07 01 13 14 IS
26. HEIGHT, j I Oiheri
3M
I Slery 14 Story 3 Story 1% S'ery ) Story 3V, Slory 4 er Mora. No, • Skvacraoe. Skyicrao
I 2 J 4 S * ' •
27. PACAOE WiOTM (Principal Impecth [ Other,
3*9
1 bay
1
1 lay
2
3 bay 4 bay
) 4
S bay 4 er More bey
S 6
2*. DEPTH,
1 1
390
1 Room 'Single Pile
1
3 Room/Double Pile
3
More 800m,
2». WINGS AND ADDITIONS, Prlmery, | Secondary, | Other,
391 392
laar Shad leer T er I S'dea Proni Additional Sior.ea
I 3)4 1
147
JO. CONSTRUCTION, Primary
jlvC
Other.
01
Marine i J.non
0)
31. ROOF CONFIGURATION, Primary,
'•.T>. Cut N»,l,
01
le.d b..r>ng Meionry
0/
W 191
Secondary, j |_ | Other,
IM 400
Oeble J.o.i
01
01
P.d O.bi.
0)
T„ fi .
"X" Oeble
01
If TH| FOUOWINO ILIMINTS All PIISINI. COOI At SICONOAIT,
lllry J,«*ol.
11 u
C uaou - l.n,..,
1)
lelvedero
14
Clack Tow*,-
17
P.r.pet Oebla
o;
Wl«» • Walk
II
11. EXTERIOR WALL MATERIALS (Onoin.O, Primary. | Secondary, [
403 *0* 407 *Ot
lower /Turret
1*
•lam Wbd
01
Mold. d ».. 3.0 vy bd
0]
brick/Common bond
0*
•rick Veneer
10
JtuttoW tVick
II
loo
I7.J4
14. EXTERIOR WALL MATERIALS lB.pl.tam.nn, | | Other,
3,d,ng., Alv
brick Vtn»
5
Similar 10 Original or in Kind Malarial
I
11. PRINCIPAL PORCH INTEGRITY: | Oihrjri
410
0'ifjmal Aliarad
1 1
Net Orlg/Nogative
1
No* Orlg/Pontive
4
Reconstruction
1
It
PORCH TYPI, | |
411
Olhen
tng.q.d Atuched
1 1
40.
PORCH DETAILS, A.
1 1 «
415
1 1
41*
c 1 1
~7iJ
Ch.ml.i.d Pott.
1
Twrnad Pom
1
Sawn
Work /Turned Ornement
1
Cleuicel Deteila
4
Remo.ed/F.ilen
4
42. CHIMNEY INTEORITYt | | Other
419"
Original Partially Rebuilt
I 1
Replaced
1
Removed/P.llen
41. CHIMNEY PLACEMENT, i I Other,
431
Interior Int Ind
I I
Int (nd/Looted Pace
1
Eat Front/leer
1
HISTORICAL DATA
IS. PERSONS OR IVINTS OP IIONIFICANCI ASSOCIATIO WITH THI SUIlOINOi (Coda Lett Nam* Flnt)
A. Typ.t I
N.mei Even,.
411 4*1 i
I. Typo, I I I Date I
413
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
N.m./E«.ni. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
TYPI,
Trad lu.lder/Crefl.men
01
Architect Contract** Attributed builder
03 01 04
Or,g. Owner Significant Later Owner Hliforlcelly Slgnlf Person
03 0* 07
Mitt Significant Event
01
Author of Pattern look Landscape Design
cr» 10
OAIE,
Pre-1710 1711. 1100
1 1
1 OOI 143 J II36-IM3 lleo-IIIS
1 4 S
III* 1913 191*19)0 19)1. 1943 Poll I94S
» 7 1 t
ENVIRONMENTAL 0ATA
II. SETTING, I I Rural. Undlit Rural, lit Up Small Town Urban. Pop. over 13.300
fir 1 a i •
61. QUAD MAP USED, [ Quad Name, — — —
574 37*
14. UIM DATA, Zone, I I Northing. | | I | | | Eastlrvgt J |
ITT 571 314 513"
63. OIIECTION SUllOiNG PACES, |
iJ
I* 17
I 3
N
s
E
W
NC
NW
SI
SW
1
a
1
4
5
*
7
I
67. FREE COMMENT.
S9f
: 1 1 1 1 1
«S
~iil
1 I I I I I I I I I I I I
I I I I I
tst
705
415
I I I I I I I 1 I I
I I I I I I
731
I I I I I I I I
iW
-w-
I I I I I I I I I I
lit
I I I 1 I
I I I I I I I I I I I
*5T
J I I
M0
I I I
6*1 »90
I I I I 1 1
^33
*95 701
1 I I I I I I I
HISTORIC RESOURCES INVENTORY
BUILDING AND STRUCTURES
148
MllTft NC*«} M
STATe OP CONNECTICUT
CONNECTICUT HISTORICAL COMMISSION
S9 SOUTH PROSPECT STREET. HARTFORD. CONNECTICUT 06106
(203) 366.3005
I. BUILDING NAMCIClMMl
FOR OFFICE USE ONi_r
Town No
SI i* No
UTM
:
1 : 1 i !
i 1 ! M !
06
QUAD
DiJTrict
IP N« IPtCl' V
□ Actuol LJ Potential
1 TOWN CITY
i mnrr r rue irownrrma ■» lor.non,
VILLAGE
(^{JUWTV
I SSHCTTir
LJPublle
I JPrl»«r».
"S USE I P;r «»nn
l/liwl orirl
ACCESSIBILITY
TO PUBLIC:
7 STYLE ar BuIldinC
EiTEHCfl v&BLE FROM PUBLC BOAO
LJym (jNo
ktepcr acc£s»3le
Dm.
Dr..
ry yes e vplAin
1 MATERIALISI liadicur ml ot tomtom whin tppiopi itlml
I Idopboord I | A.be.ro. Siding | Bfnk
DATE flP COWITHUCTloW
□ Othe»
(Specify/
I J Wood Shingle (_] A.pholt Siding
I I Board t> Bolton L_J Stucco
□ Aluminum I |
Siding | |
Concrete
Typoi
L_J Pleld.tone
LJ Cobble. tone
□ Cut tlono
Typ.,
f ITAuCTudAl IriTtu
I 1 Wood framo I I Pott and boom
I ) Load bearing masonry
I I Other (Specify/
| | bo I loon
I I Structural iron or steel
10 HOOF tfirnrl
I I Cable
[ J Plot | ) Maneord
Q Sh'0 1 LJ Hip
I I Gombrel
'Mofeno/1
I I Wood Shingle LJ *»pholt | J Tin
| Atpholt .hingle \ ) Built up | | Tllo
| | Monitor
I J Round
LJ Slate
,—, Other
_J 'Specify)
I I .owtooth
□ Other
'Specify/
M NUMBtft or 5T6ftiei
APPROK.IMAT E DIMENSION.
Tl CONDITION ntuuTTurel ,r.,.-,,,«i
( I Excellent | ] Coad I ) Polf l_J Deteriorated 1 I E. client | | Good | I Polr J Deteriorated
1 1 int EGBIT Y , (..., ,11. .11.
On orlginol I I
I ) Morod
□ On o
• He
D f" Qn«
if rti E xPlain
I I RELA TE D Ou T flunB l NSi oft LA/JusCAPE r E A T u 'UTT
| ) Bom I I Shed I ! Oarage I I 0<her landscape feature, or building. (Specify!
I I hou'.e 9 ' I I Shop I 1 Cordon
it SURROUNDING Environment
, I Open land 1 I |„° j " I I Re.ldenllol
I ) Commercial {. ) i,i„| I J Rural
I I Scattered building, vl.lble from .it.
I I High building den.lly
TTTN"TrTHlTrTT(5Nl hiP SP lulL _ D i nS A n luP P aUVDTRoT
(OVER)
AA - 1
149
17 OTHER NOTABLE FEATURES OF BUILDING OH SITE lilllffllH tint ..i ralrntuj
-8
«
3
e
8
o
*—
z
o
K
a.
S
u
l/l
Ui
o
" IB ARCHITECT
BuIlOer
1} miSTShicAl on AflCMlTECTuMAL IUpOATAncE
Ui
u
z
•<
u
u.
z
o
C?
W1
Ui
o
ac
3
SI
PHOTOGR APHE R
□ ATI
o
o
VIE" W
NEGATIVE ON FILE
z
a.
Placm
name
DATE
>-
CD
a
Ui
Photograph
ORGANIZATION
-j
Harm
a-
3
ADDBE55
w
u
i« <
'uSSEOUPnT HElo EvaLuATIonI '
if T hRea t5 t o auiLHiue an si te
I I Nona Irnoxi. | (High-ciyi I I Vondollim I I Davalopart I I Oth»r
I ) "•"•~°l LJ Pri»ot« J Deterioration | ] Zoning ( ] E.plonotl
HIST 6 NEW J 77 I6ACK,
AA - 2
150
APPENDIX C
Proposal for Revision of BLM Historic
Site Record Form N6-8111-2
151
CrNV-06-
RIS#: '
NSM#:
DRAFT
Historic Site Record
United States
Department of the Interior
Bureau of Land Management
Battle Mountain District
CRES Rating_
CR Report #:
Recorder:
Date:
T R
Map Ref:
Sec.
UTM:
Descriptive
Location:
Resource/Planning Aifea:
Project:
County :
Land Status:^
Site Plan:
Site Name:
Site Type:
Single Structure_
District # of structures
Complex # of structures
Archaeological Site
General Description of Site and Its Condition:
For Mining /Mil ling Sites:
Site. Function
Mining
Milling_
Combined
For Mine/Combined Sites:
Underground Access
Adit/Tunnel_
Vertical Shaft_
Inclined Shaft_
Number of Headframes
For Milling/Combined Sites:
Waste Product
Slag piles
Tailings pond/piles
Features
Orebins
Large Circular Tanks
Roasting Oven
Smelter
Enclosed, not accessible
Size and Shape of Waste Rock
Tailings Piles:
152
Artifacts:
Historical Information (including dates, owners, thematic associations, etc.)
Statement of Significance!
References:
Photographs: Roll/Frame #
Location:
CRES Rating:
Yes No Unknown
Comments
Significant Nationally
Significant Locally
Association with Event
Association with Person
Representative Type
Condition (good)
Evaluator:
Title:
Date:
CrNV-06-
Structure Type:
Past Use:
153
Structure Description Form
Structure # Site Name
Dwelling Barn Corral Outbuilding Commercial
Religious School Kiln Mining Ore Processing^
Other
Present Use:
Public
Approximate Dimensions :
Number of Stories:
CONSTRUCTION
Concrete
Rubble Stone_
Dressed Stone
Adobe Brick_
Poured Mud
Log: Horizontal Mass Wall
Log: Vertical or Palisade_
Timber Frame
Balloon Frame
Wattle and Daub
Fired Brick_
Other
ROOF SHAPE
Side Gable_
End Gable_
Hipped
Shed
Other
ROOF SYSTEM
Not Applicable_
Log
Framed Truss
Other
FOUNDATION
Stone_
Concrete
Other
None
ROOF COVERING
Not Applicable
Shingles__
Corrugated Metal__
; Pirt__
'Other
HEADFRAMES
# of Sheave Wheels__
Orebins Attached to
Headframes?
List Alterations, Features of Note:
EXTERIOR WALL COVERING
Not Applicable
Clapboard
Matched Horizontal Plank
Vertical Plank_
Shingles
Corrugated Metal
Brick Veneer
Plaster_
Other
OPENINGS
Stone Lintel
Wood LintelJ
Arched
Wood Frame
CHIMNEY
Present
Not Present_
Material
Exterior?
Sketch Floor Plan:
Interior?
154
APPENDIX D
THEMATIC APPROACHES TO HISTORICAL/
ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES
I. Transportation
A. Railroads
1. Geographical: the Battle Mountain District.
There were few rail lines in central Nevada,
and their location is known. The survey could
be further divided into the "northern system,"
including the Central Pacific, Eureka & Palisade,
Nevada Central, Eureka-Ruby Hill, Austin City,
and Battle Mountain-Lewis; and the "southern
system" of rail lines focusing on Tonopah.
2. Considerations
a. Time: the historic period.
b. Resources pertaining to operation of railroads
bridges, tunnels, flag stops, water stops
(water tanks), switchyards, roundhouses,
maintenance structures, coal tipples
c. Resources existing as a response to railroads:
towns (Palisade, Battle Mountain, Ledlie,
Alpha, etc.), hotels, depots and stations,
livestock loading pens and chutes, camps for
railroad laborers .
d. Research Questions;
-Relationship of railroads to the mining
sector
-Role of railroads in development of the
livestock industry
-Relationship of railroads to stage and
freight transport
-Effect of railroads on settlement patterns
(compare Lander and Eureka counties with
Nye County)
B. Stage and Freight Transport
1. Geographical: the Battle Mountain District.
Stage and freight transport created a District-
wide (and in truth, statewide) web of roads that
connected major towns with each other and with
mining districts, and ran through all the region's
valleys. It would be inappropriate to study only
one route, for example Eureka to Belmont, because
that route was simply a segment of a much larger
network. Exception might be made for the Pony
Express and Overland routes, because of their
155
clear identification with development of trans-
portation and communication across the entire
trans -Mississippi west.
2. Considerations
a. Time: the entire historic period, up to (and
potentially including) the time when auto
courts and motels took over completely the
care and feeding of travellers .
b. Resources: stage and freight routes, and
the stations, bridges and markers located
along them; offices of stage and freight
lines, such as those operated by W. L.
Pritchard, Woodruff & Ennor , William Wilson
(Eureka), G. W. Jacobs (Austin), Butler and
Clark (Tonopah) .
c. Research Questions:
-Geographical/chronological development of
the network (including stations)
-Incidence of stations erected by transport
companies, or funded by them; stations
owned and operated independently
-Response of the network to changes in pat-
terns of settlement and mining activity
-Relation and response of network to rail-
roads and to auto travel
-Relation of stations and their operators to
the occupation and agricultural activity
of the valleys in which they were located.
Do stations become ranches? Do ranches
later take on station functions? Do some
stations never experience conversion to
ranches? Why?
-Physical characteristics of stations when
they were operating as such, both with
and without associated ranching activity;
materials, building types, size, and what
determined these
Toll Roads
1. Geographical: the Battle Mountain District
2. Considerations:
'... Time: historic period
b. Resources: toll routes, toll stations
c. Research Questions:
-Period during which toll franchises were
granted
-Reason for toll roads
-Toll routes
-Characteristics of toll stations
156
-Selection of toll station sites
-Contribution (major? minor? none?) to
development of transportation networks
-Subsequent history (abandoned? taken over
by freight/stage lines? by county?)
D. Highways/Auto
1. Geographical: the Battle Mountain District
2. Considerations:
a. Time: c. 1900-present , coinciding with
spread of auto travel (and recognizing that
effective cutoff date for cultural resource
surveys is 50 years)
b. Resources: major routes, including the
Humboldt, Central and "southern" route (Ely-
Tonopah) and their 20th century counterparts:
1-80, Lincoln Highway, Midland Route; also
8A and 51; gas stations, auto courts, motels,
markers (such as those placed along the
Lincoln Highway in many parts of the country) ,
stage/freight stations that adapted to auto
traffic
c. Research Questions:
-How highways affect population centers, in
terms of location, commercial activity
-Effect of highways on stage lines, stations
-Role of highways in tourism
II. Commerce
1. Geographical: the Battle Mountain District
2. Considerations:
a. Time: the historic period
b. Resources: business establishments (stores,
warehouses, hotels, livery stables, banks),
residences
c. Research Questions;
-Relationship of commerce to mining and
agricultural sectors
-Kinds of commercial activity: in large
towns , in small camps
-Spheres of influence: Eureka, Austin,
Battle Mountain, Tcnopah. Do businessmen
from these towns stake out commercial
"territory" in outlying mining camps?
If so, to what extent? Where?
-Relationship of local commercial centers to
valley agricultural communities
-Role of various ethnic/nationality groups
in commercial activity.
157
III. Agriculture
Agriculture as an economic activity is perhaps best con-
sidered as a whole, rather than being broken into sub-
themes, which in any case would not be as discrete as
those for transportation or industry, for example.
1. Geographical: the Battle Mountain District
2. Considerations
a. Time: While the overall chronological frame-
work should be c. 1860-19^-0, it is possible to
identify several periods of major developments
in central Nevada agricultural history:
-1860-c. 1875: The period of initial agricul-
tural activity, characterized by small
farms producing a wide variety of commodi-
ties, from meat to vegetables, salad
greens, and grains, principally for local
markets created by the mining boom of the
1860's.
-c . 1875-1890: As the initial mining boom
faded, farmers and ranchers turned to
intensive development of a range livestock
industry, principally cattle but with
increasing numbers of sheep. They were
aided by proximity of rail lines (princi-
pally, the Central Pacific), introduction
of barbed-wire fencing and windmills, and
adoption of winter feeding--the last
three being in part responses to the
problem of overgrazing that attended
increase in livestock numbers.
-C.1890-WWI: This period was characterized
by significant growth in the sheep
industry. It also saw the beginning of
state and federal programs to manage both
land and water resources, and also con-
certed efforts to rid the range of wild
horses .
-WWI-19^-0: In this period, Federal management
of the public lands was facilitated by the
Taylor Grazing Act and later establishment
of the BLM. Artesian wells tapped hereto-
fore inaccessible water sources, helping
to mitigate the region's chronic water
shortage .
b. Resources: ranches (including dwellings,
barns, corrals, pens, sheds, and other out-
buildings), horsetraps, corrals at springs
and other watering places, windmills, irri-
gation systems .
158
c. Research Questions:
-Ranches as industrial units: forms,
materials, arrangement, functions. Do
they change over time? If so, how?
Do stock cattle ranches physically differ
from sheep ranches? From dairy farms?
How?
-Developments in livestock breeding
-Irrigation systems: technology and methods
-Horsetraps: technology and methods
-Role of Basque immigrants in sheep industry
-Impact of rail lines on agricultural
activity
-Livestock production: Do a few ranchers
dominate the industry, or is production
fairly evenly distributed among all
ranchers? Does this distribution change
over time?
-Sheep vs. cattle: Do sheep (or cattle)
predominate in some valleys and not in
others? Does this change over time? Do
ranchers specialize in one animal, or are
there many instances where ranches pro-
duce both cattle and sheep?
-Dairying: characteristics, extent (numeri-
cally and geographically)
-Development of hay farms (Desert Land
Entries, corporate farms, etc.)
d. Approaches to evaluation: The fact that one
ranch may have run more stock than another
does not necessarily mean the larger ranch
is more "important." It would be more
appropriate to consider the contributions,
or example set, by a rancher in enhancing
the overall quality or quantity of livestock
production in central Nevada, for example
introduction of new irrigation methods or
breeding stock. Also, the importance of
agriculture in the region is due to the fact
that many people participated: a collective
rather than individual contribution to
historical development. Under these circum-
stances, survey of ranches and other cultural
resources associated with agricultu: e should
be geared toward identification of those
resources best able to convey understanding
and appreciation of various chronological
and topical aspects of the region's agri-
cultural history. For example:
159
-Farms and ranches whose existing, structures
are characteristic of specific periods of
development: an 1860's farm or small
ranch, 1880's cattle ranch, a sheep ranch
from the turn of the century
-Ranches whose continuous operation from the
1860's to the present is illustrated by
the variety of their buildings and
structures, in terms of forms, material
and us e
-Ranches that clearly illustrate specific
forms of agricultural activity (sheep,
cattle, dairy, horses), or a group of
ranches each of which represents a stage
in the development of the cattle industry
or sheep raising in the region
-Horsetraps (with and without appurtenant
structures) that illustrate developments
in the art of horsecatching, through
their materials and spatial arrangements
-Buildings and structures, (including corrals
and pens) that illustrate ranchers'
reliance on locally-available materials
-Windmills as examples of developments in
agricultural technology
-Irrigation systems, from specific periods or
that show development of irrigation
methods over time
-Ranches associated with persons who made
significant contributions to the live-
stock industry, such as introduction of
new breeds, or crossbreeding, or who
"set the pattern" for ranching in a par-
ticular valley or region
IV. Industry
A. Charcoal Industry
1. Geographical: the Battle Mountain District
2. Considerations:
a. Time: c. 1875-85
b. Resources: charcoal kilns, pits, and asso-
ciated structures, including dwellings of
charcoal burners, and lumber camps that
produced mainly for the kilns
c. Research Questions:
-Factors influencing incidence and location
of charcoal kilns
-Ownership: independent or mining companies?
-Kilns: materials and designs
160
-Charcoal "camps "--relation of industrial
and residential structures; types of
residential structures
-Role of Swiss-Italian immigrants in the
charcoal industry; how they coped with
decline in need for charcoal
B. Brewing
1. Geographical: the Battle Mountain District
2. Considerations:
a. Time: the historic period
b. Resources: brewery structures, dwellings of
brewery owners , farms owned by brewers for
grain production
c. Research Questions:
-Was most liquor produced by a few large
firms, or was there a sizable "cottage
industry" as well?
-Markets: did brewers supply only the towns
in which they were located, or did they
ship large quantities to outlying areas
(such as mining camps). Were local
brewers the principal suppliers for the
whole central Nevada region, or did they
face serious competition from Virginia
City and other western population centers?
-Role of German immigrants in brewing--ma jor?
minor?
-Did liquor production remain fairly constant
over time, or did it fluctuate along with
the mining economy?
-Did any one brewer dominate production in
central Nevada, or did brewers develop
specific market areas?
-Chronology: beginnings, peak period(s),
decline and influencing factors
C . Lumber/Logging
1. Geographical: the Battle Mountain District
2. Considerations:
a. Time: the historic period
b. Resources: lumber camps, sawmills
c. Research Questions:
-Types of wood available
-Principal markets for wood and lumber
-Ownership: independent or mining companies?
-Characteristics of lumber camps
-Sawmills: size, types, machinery
161
D. Lime Industry
1. Geographical: the Battle Mountain District
2. Considerations:
a. Time: the historic period
b. Resources: lime kilns, limestone quarries,
transportation systems between the kilns and
quarries; outbuildings associated with lime
production (crushers, storehouses, etc.)
c. Research Questions:
-Incidence of lime burning in region
-Location of lime kilns
-Persons involved in lime industry
-Structures associated with lime burning:
types , materials , forms , arrangement
E. Brickmaking
1. Geographical: the Battle Mountain District
2. Considerations:
a. Time: the historic period
b. Resources: brick yards, kilns, pug-mills
(mixing)
c. Research Questions:
-Incidence of brickmaking in region
-Factors influencing location
-Principal markets
-Brickmaking as industrial process
-Kiln types
F. Salt
1. Geographical: the Battle Mountain District
2. Considerations:
a. Time: the historic period
b. Resources: evaporation pans, salt marshes,
dwellings and outbuildings associated with
salt production
c. Research Questions:
-Incidence of salt production
-Factors influencing location
-Markets
-Methods
-Persons participating in the industry
G. Mining
Geography and Time: Like agriculture, mining in
central Nevada is a large and complex theme which surveys
can approach from many directions. Given the large numbers
of data available on mining, and the numerous cultural
resources still extant, development of survey strategy and
162
focus will be crucial if field investigation and further
research are to have meaningful results beyond simple
accumulation of more information.
While the ultimate goal is to understand and evaluate
mining and its associated physical remains in a District-wide
(if not statewide) context, it will be most useful, logis-
tically, to develop the overall survey in segments which will
not only provide, individually, information about various
aspects of the region's mining history, but also, when con-
sidered collectively, present a full story.
In all cases, investigation should be based on the con-
cept of mining as a group of inextricably related phenomena:
extraction, transportation, processing, and occupation of
land for residential and commercial purposes incidental to
mining activity. Thus, mines should be considered in rela-
tion to mills and transportation systems, and mining camps
should be considered not as isolated instances of human
settlement, but as simply one component of the mining
phenomenon. Nearly all previous studies have viewed mining
camps as individual expressions of colorful frontier life,
springing up sui generis across the landscape. In fact, the
only reason mining camps existed at all was to provide a
place of residence and a source of goods and services for
people locally engaged in extraction and processing of ore,
and surveys that do not consider camps and towns in this
context should not be conducted. The only exceptions to
this rule will occur when specific elements of a camp or
town are studied in connection with other themes, such
as commerce or architecture, or when the subject is one of
the principal towns (Eureka, Battle Mountain, Austin, Tonopah,
and Belmont--see below) . In sum: the basic unit of survey
for mining, whether in the field or in the library, must be
the mining district: mines, mills and other processing
activities, transport systems and camps.
In order to develop an understanding of the evolution
of mining techniques and patterns over time, one approach
would be to group all the region's mining districts according
to the last decade in which they were productive. Organiza-
tion by last productive decade is useful because most physical
remains of any mining district will date to the later period
of operatiun, with many earlier remains either removed or
obliterated by subsequent activity. If the districts can
then be researched and inventoried chronologically (i.e.
beginning with those productive only in the 1860*s, and
ending with those producing after WWI) , the result should be
a comprehensive inventory of historic resources that reflect
the evolution of mining technology and methods through the
entire historic period. If it is not feasible to survey all
163
mining districts at one go, one might select one district
from each decade, inventory those, and develop predictive
models for use in surveys of the rest, whether the latter
surveys are systematic or project-specific.
Other strategies:
-A thematic survey and inventory of placer mining, con-
centrating on hydraulicking and gold dredging at Round
Mountain, Manhattan and Battle Mountain;
-A survey and inventory of the Tybo-Hot Creek region, in
which the mines and mills, charcoal industry, communi-
ties and adjacent ranches (for example, Dugan's and
Page's ranches west of Hot Creek) are treated as closely-
related parts of the whole. This area may form a coher-
ent historic district in terms of time, place and
relatedness of activities ; although it covers a fairly
large geographical area, it could be treated, in terms
of the National Register, as a "discontinuous" district,
rather than as an overly-large land area defined to en-
compass the outermost limits of the cultural resources
associated with the historic district. If this in the
end should prove unworkable, the area should be broken
into two historic districts, Tybo and Hot Creek.
-Discovery of rich ore at Reese River in 1862 and on Mt.
Oddie in 1900 not only resulted in the development of
large mining districts at those places, but also
fostered (generally with less success) mining in
adjacent regions. Notable "spinoffs" from these major
mining centers were (1) the intensive activity on both
sides of the Toiyabe Range in the 1860's (including
mines associated with Canyon City, Washington and San
Juan on the west flank, and Clinton, Geneva, Guadalajara/
Santa Fe, Kinston, Park Canyon, and Ophir on the east);
and (2) the small boom in south-central Nye County,
east of Tonopah, in 1900-1910 (including Hannapah ,
Ellendale, Clifford, Bellehelen, Silverbow and Golden
Arrow) . Thematic surveys of each of these areas would
focus on the nature of small-scale mining in each
period; results of each survey could then be compared
to illustrate both changes and similarities in small-
scale mining over a 40-year period.
-Given the loss and destruction of cultural resources
associated with mining, both in the past and very
probably in the future, some attempt should be made to
identify and if possible protect well-preserved
examples of these resources and systems. Although not
ideal in terms of overall cultural resource management,
protection priority should be given to areas with sig-
nificant concentrations of historic mining resources,
over those where mining resources are very few or have
been extensively ravaged, if only to conserve a data
164
base for future survey. Areas with many, and generally
intact, resources simply have more potential in terms of
developing an understanding of mining technology and pro-
cesses, and they should not be lost before they have been
intensively studied and inventoried.
V. Architecture
Study of Nevada architecture has been limited to major
population centers such as Las Vegas, Virginia City and Reno.
National Register nominations for Austin, Eureka, Berlin
and lone have discussed structures in those towns, but not
comprehensively nor with much attention to the buildings as
architecture . The architecture of rural Nevada, with the
exception of URS/Blume's 1977 survey, has been almost wholly
neglected .
Priorities for survey of central Nevada's architectural
resources are:
1. Inventory structure by structure , rather than simply
listing "ranch" or "town" on an inventory form. The sug-
gestions for a structure inventory form in Appendix C are
made with this in mind.
2. Development of a typology for architectural resources,
in terms of building types, materials, and methods of construc-
tion. The chapter of this Overview's historic narrative that
deals with physical characteristics of ranch structures is
written with the intention that it serve as a partial basis
for such a typology.
Some considerations:
1. Begin with the assumption that all buildings and
structures have at least potential interest as architecture.
In other words, "Victorian gingerbread" houses or commercial
blocks are not the only resources of architectural interest
in central Nevada, and indeed constitute but a very small
part of the region's architectural "universe." Rather, the
architecture of central Nevada is characterized by imaginative
and often ad hoc assembly of local materials, and survey and
evaluation of the region's architectural resources should be
conducted with this in mind.
2. Physical integrity is one of the basic criteria for
National Register evaluation of all cultural resources. It
is particularly important in evaluating architectural
resources, because their significance rests solely upon their
material characteristics, rather than partly on their asso-
ciations, as is the case with "historic" resources. Thus
the degree to which a structure retains physical integrity
has a direct bearing on the significance of that structure,
in terms of its being able to represent or illustrate a
given architectural practice or form.
165
3. The character of structures associated with feeding,
sheltering and otherwise caring for range livestock tends to
alter but little over time and space, "because there are only
a limited number of ways to deal with a cow or a sheep. This
continuity of form and use is a significant aspect of the
architecture of agricultural structures. Residential struc-
tures, on the other hand, may exhibit much more variety over
time and space, reflecting local, regional or national
architectural trends, access to materials and artisans, dif-
ferent lifestyles (town vs. country), or, simply, changing
attitudes toward what constitutes proper living space. In
looking at residential architecture, one might consider:
a. Comparing rural residences with small town or
camp dwellings, and with houses in major population centers.
Are there noticeable differences in materials, size and form?
To what degree are national trends reflected in the houses of
each group, and how? Are population centers more susceptible
to these trends than rural areas? (This sort of comparison
must be done with care, because in many cases houses remain-
ing in mining towns and camps are not representative of those
communities' architecture as a whole. Historic photographs
will provide important information in this regard, and should
be considered basic research tools for any survey of central
Nevada architecture—rural or urban. )
b. It might be possible to divide the region's
architecture according to materials or construction methods:
1) "national," including fired brick, stone, "log cabin,"
box frame, balloon frame; and 2) "indigenous," including
adobe brick, poured adobe, wattle and daub, and localized
instances of stone and log (horizontal mass wall or vertical
"palisade") construction. The latter category should also
include dwellings built by Native Americans in the historic
period (for example those of CrNV-06-9^9 near Big Cow Canyon
Road in Nye Co.) and might even be extended to include pre-
historic dwellings, since the focus of such a study would be
functional manipulation of immediately available building
materials .
L±. Informed evaluation of central Nevada architecture
will depend heavily upon having as much information as pos-
sible from which to make judgments, since to a large degree
the evaluation will have to be made on the basis of compari-
son. The survey should try to identify buildings and
structures that best represent or illustrate:
-use of materials
-construction methods
-forms or styles indigenous to the region, the Great
Basin and the Southwest
-forms or styles derived from national or urban trends
(often spread via builders' and architects' catalogs)
-widespread or characteristic forms of architecture
-unusual forms of architecture
166
-construction at various periods
-structure types, and varieties within each type
-work of a craftsman or artisan, for example a stone-
mason who built a number of buildings in a community
or region
VI. Settlement/ Community: A Model for Investigation
There were basically three forms of "settlement" in
central Nevada during the 19th and early 20th centuries:
mining camps, towns, and agricultural occupation of the
valleys and foothills. Mining camps were for the most part
only incidental agents of settlement, in that people came
to hitherto unpopulated places to live and work in them, but
generally for but a very short time. Therefore, as noted
in the discussion on mining surveys, camps should be studied
as part of the "physical plant" of mining and its related
activities, rather than as discrete units of settlement.
A handful of camps (Austin, Eureka, Tonopah, Battle
Mountain and Belmont) developed into real communities (towns)
through their association with very large, productive mining
districts, location on major transportation routes, status
as county seats, and role as service centers for outlying
mining districts and agricultural communities. Austin,
Eureka and Belmont are National Register Historic Districts,
much of their 19th century character still observable.
Battle Mountain, on the other hand, has lost many of its
19th century associations, due largely to its location on
Interstate 80 and attendant modernization. Portions of
Tonopah may be fairly well-preserved, because the town is
more recent; a survey planned for summer, 1980, should result
in identification of structures remaining from that town's
historic settlement period.
Between the extremes of camp and major town are com-
munities such as Tybo , Manhattan, lone, and Round Mountain,
which were longer-lived than most camps, but never achieved
the size and impact of Battle Mountain, Austin, Eureka or
Tonopah. Of these four towns, lone is of interest chiefly
as a former county seat; the other three are best studied
in connection with their associated industrial/economic base
(placer mining and dredging at Round Mountain and Manhattan,
silver mining and charcoal burning at Tybo) .
Apart from the townbuilders , the principal agents of
settlement, as occupiers of land and developers of commu-
nities, were farmers, ranchers and their families. All too
often it has been considered sufficient, particularly in a
local context, to recognize the "first settler" and other
"firsts", such as school, bank, store, house, etc. However,
the act of being "first" was usually only a matter of
historical accident, and such "firsts" may have in the long
167
run been irrelevant to the historical development of the
locality or region. Knowing when the first settler came to
a given locality is useful in tracing settlement patterns
over a larger area. But settlement implies more than simple
occupation of land by a single individual; it means
establishment of social networks, recreation of community
institutions in a new land, development of a subsistence base
and evolution of land use and ownership patterns. Local
settlement also does not occur in a vacuum: it is influenced
by patterns of settlement over a whole region, by transpor-
tation systems, by economic factors, by the natural
environment.
The basic unit of study of rural settlement in the
Battle Mountain District is the valley. Valleys historically
have held strong connotations of place in the Far West, where
towns were few and far apart, and counties too large and
unpopulated to act as viable reference points for rural
dwellers. This concept of the valley as place is reinforced
by topography. Each valley is to some extent isolated from
other valleys by hills or mountains that act as physical and
as psychological inhibitors of inter-valley social and
economic intercourse. The fact that adjacent mountain ranges
may have been swarming with raining activity did not in the
long run affect the valley as a definable place: mining
camps had a different economic base, population structure
and social organization, and were generally short-lived as
well.
In selecting valleys for survey, it should be kept in
mind that although mountain ranges provide the first defini-
tion, valleys are physically open at one or both ends, and
where one valley opens into another the "boundary" of a
valley community may shift over time, or be much less pro-
nounced than boundaries formed by mountain ranges. Further-
more, the extreme length of some valleys may have encouraged
establishment of more than one "community" within its con-
fines. For example, Crescent, Little Fish Lake, Grass,
Diamond and Hot Creek valleys are fairly well-defined units.
Reese River, on the other hand, is divisible into two, the
"boundary" between them being the Shoshone Range where it
moves from the west to the east side of the valley. The
northern end of Reese River would be oriented, historically,
toward Battle Mountain, while the southern portion, sur-
rounded by extensive mining activity, would have been
oriented toward Austin. Big Smoky Valley as a settlement
unit is reasonably definable down to its southern end, where
below the Toiyabe Range it opens into confluence with the
lone Valley. The separation of the upper Big Smoky probably
became particularly pronounced after 1900, due to the influ-
ence of Tonopah. Likewise Monitor Valley, which is fairly
168
closed at the southern end, but opens at the north into a
"basin" formed by the confluence of Monitor, Kobeh and
Antelope valleys. Antelope Valley in Lander County may not
prove to be a discrete settlement unit, but rather an
extension of the lower Reese River community.
Just as there was a definable pattern in the physical
arrangement of buildings in mining camps, so also was there
a pattern to the arrangement of living in the region's
valleys. The camp/town pattern was basically concentric,
though it varied according to topographical circumstances.
At the center was the business district, with residential
areas ringing the district, and industrial (mining) areas
at the outer edge and extending up and back into the
mountains (Fig. 4).
B' BUSINESS
RiRESIOENTIAL
I.WDUSTRIAL
CR
NARROW CANYON
D
BROAO CANYON
CD C
D
Figure 1: The Geography of Major Activities in Mining Camps
The camp/town pattern was not unique to central Nevada
nor to the West, being rather an importation by the inhabi-
tants from cities, towns and villages of the eastern and
midwestern U.S., and rather forcibly imposed upon the
mountain landscape. The valley pattern, however, could be
considered more "indigenous," as it was based almost entirely
upon location of water sources—mountain streams and springs--
with wood and grazing as other important considerations. As
a result, the valley settlement pattern generally consisted
of individual ranches arranged along roads like widely-spaced
knots on a string, one string running down each side of the
valley. These two north-south roads were connected by others
running across the valley, from one ranch to another.
Occasionally one or more ranches were located toward the
middle of the valley, at the intersection of several roads
(Fig. 5).
169
RifUNCH
Figure 2: The Valley Settlement Pattern
Within the valley network, some roads were more
"important," due chiefly to the amount of traffic on them.
Since major transportation routes tended to follow the line
of least resistance, nearly every valley had at least one
segment of a longer route connecting widely-spaced towns
or mining centers, the segment generally corresponding to
one of the two north-south "strings." This correspondence,
however, was neither inevitable nor invariable. At least
two factors could influence the location of the valley's
major road: location of way stations and occurrence of
mining activity in the mountains to either side.
For example, the main road, with attendant station or
stations, might at first run down the west side of the
valley (Fig. 6A ) . In a few years, a rancher or would-be
entrepreneur established a station on the east side of the
valley, and the stage/freight route might then have moved
to take advantage of new services (Fig. 6B) . This move
could be similarly effected by discovery of silver in the
mountain range to the east (Fig. 6C ) .
170
R. RANCH S'STACE STOP
Figure 3: Main Transportation Routes
Relocation
Location and
The three elements of valley settlement were thus the
ranches, a major transportation route, and mining in the
adjacent mountain ranges, to which valley dwellers related
in different ways. The first, and generally most enduring,
relationship was among the valley dwellers themselves, as
neighbors bound to one another by geography, by their com-
mon lives as farmers and ranchers, as parents of school-age
children, and perhaps eventually by marriage and family
ties. The second relationship was with the route segment
through the valley, along which stage and freight lines
broughx mail, occasional shipments of goods, and travellers
from far and wide, allowing valley dwellers access to the
outside world without the need for travel outside its
confines. The third relationship was with population centers
at one or both ends of the transportation segment running
through the valley. This relationship was largely a commer-
cial one, the town functioning as a market for ranchers'
produce and as a supplier of valley dwellers' material goods.
It could also be partly a social relationship, in that
ranchers and families could go to town to vote, attend cul-
tural events and festivities, and talk with the inhabitants
171
and with residents of other valleys who came to town on
similar pursuits. Once established, this town-valley
relationship remained fairly consistent over time, for
example that between Diamond Valley and Eureka, Upper Reese
River and Austin, lower Reese River and Battle Mountain,
Monitor Valley and Belmont, Crescent Valley and Beowawe,
Grass Valley and Austin. The first town-valley relationship
for all residents of Big Smoky Valley would have been with
Austin; a second relationship, much stronger in the south,
developed with Tonopah after 1900.
These town/valley relationships were strong to the
degree that a major population center was reasonably nearby,
as in the examples listed above. They were most tenuous
when major towns were reached only with some effort, as would
have been the case from lone, Hot Creek and Stone Cabin
valleys, and Reveille and Ralston valleys before discovery
of silver at Tonopah.
The fourth relationship, which either took the place of
a strong town/valley connection or functioned along with it,
was that between the valley and nearby mining camps. This
was usually a series of relationships that changed over time
as mining activity came and went. For example, Hot Creek
Valley residents in the 1860's conducted business and social
affairs with Hot Creek, but in the 1870's turned to Tybo.
Residents of Big Smoky Valley supplied a series of small
markets in camps such as Kingston, Geneva and Clinton in the
1860's and 1870's, but in the early 20th century turned
their interests east to Round Mountain and Manhattan. In
lone Valley, lone, Union Grantsville and Ellsworth offered
markets to local ranchers in the 1860's and 1870's, as did
Berlin in the 1890's.
These four relationships should be definable in the
survey of any valley settlement, although there will be
variations due to geographical factors, presence or lack of
railroads, and the vagaries of mining history in the region.
(For example, upper Reese River Valley experienced signifi-
cant concentrations of both mining and agricultural activity
in the 1860's and 1870's. The surrounding mountains were
the focus of much early mining exploration, and the Reese
River, largest water source south of the Humboldt, offered
opportunities for irrigation and settlement to a degree not
possible in most other valleys of the region.) Identification
of these relationships results in a strong basis for cultural
resource survey of rural settlement in central Nevada, because
it establishes the temporal, geographic, economic and social
context within which the physical expressions of that settle-
ment can be studied and evaluated.
172
Once the four relationships have been described, the
next step is to place physical resources within the context
thus established, and to evaluate these resources in terms
of their role in, and ability to represent, various aspects
of valley settlement history and development.
Within the valley, list:
-Ranches that date from the first 5-10 years of settlement;
these will have set the basic physical arrangement of
living in the valley;
-The major route through the valley, including any changes
in the route over time;
-Stations along that route, original and subsequent;
-Location of post offices, and dates of operation;
-Location of schools, and dates of operation;
-Ranches owned by one family over many years ; such fami-
lies provide continuity in the midst of temporal, eco-
nomic and social change;
-"Big" ranches: those with the most livestock; such
ranches, by virtue of their size, may have set a pattern
for agricultural activity, and their owners may have
become prominent social or political figures in the
valley.
By mapping the sites in terms of both function and
time, it will be possible to identify focal points within
each valley community, and to see if they change (both in
kind and in location) over time. The potentially most sig-
nificant sites will be those that occur most frequently in
the lists. This frequency will vary from valley to valley
(and the reasons for such variation are worth investigation) .
For example, one or two ranches in one valley may have been
foci from the beginning of settlement, while in another
valley the foci may have moved over time, or have been
numerous but relatively weak.
Once this phase is completed, sites identified as
valley focal points must be examined in the field to ascer-
tain their integrity. This integrity is basically defined
as the ability of a site or sites to convey feelings of time,
place and association with those events, activities or
people being recognized in the survey as contributing to the
historic character and development of settlemenj and com-
munity life in the valley. For example, a ranch on which
all buildings but a few mud and log sheds are of mid-20th
century vintage is no longer eligible for nomination to the
National Register as an 1870's stage station and post office.
Nor do a group of stone walls adequately represent the life
of the valley's leading rancher, long-time inhabitant and
school district clerk. In evaluating integrity, remember
173
also that the basic living unit was the ranch , dwelling,
barn, outbuildings, corrals, and not simply a house by
itself. Thus where possible all structures on a ranch
dating from the time of the event, activity and/or person
being recognized should be included in the survey and
nomination.
Participation of various nationalities in the
historical development of central Nevada can, at least in
part, be studied in the rural settlement context, as the
historic narrative section of this Overview has briefly
demonstrated. Using a combination of census records, tax
rolls, and the early township survey maps, it is often
possible to associate persons of various national origins
with specific ranches and valleys, thus creating a vehicle
for recognition of the region's ethnic diversity. This
recognition is not limited to participation in agricultural
settlement, of course, but the role of nationalities in
other aspects of central Nevada history is better studied
in other contexts. Examples include the Chinese in railroad
construction, as miners in some districts and as participants
in the economy of other camps and towns; the Swiss and
Italians in the charcoal industry; Germans as brewers and
businessmen; Basques in agriculture.
In the rural settlement context, study questions might
include:
-What was the ethnic composition of the valley in the
early settlement years?
-How did this composition change over time? Why?
-Are some nationality groups more numerous than others?
-Does the presence of a "dominant" nationality group
color the way of life or society of the valley?
174
A NOTE ON HISTORICAL SOURCES
A great deal of information is available on the history
of central Nevada in government records, university libraries,
the state historical society, collections outside Nevada
(principally in California) and in published materials. Some
materials have been used extensively by others studying the
region (for example, Angel's 1881 History of Nevada) but many
more have not been fully appreciated.
The historian's task in conducting research is twofold:
deciding what sources to use, and how. Several factors con-
dition the approach, among them the purpose and scope of the
research, and the time available in which to accomplish it.
In preparing this study for the BLM-Battle Mountain District,
one of the investigators ' purposes was to present an over-
view, arranged around major themes, that would serve as
context for interpretation of individual historical and
architectural resources. To this end, they consulted many
kinds of historical materials, from published secondary
sources to newspapers and manuscript census population
schedules. In many cases, they found secondary sources
quite valuable, offering insights and information heretofore
untapped by previous researchers. On the other hand, many
primary sources, such as letters, diaries, account books,
etc. were found to be either unhelpful or too narrowly
focused to contribute much to a broad-based cultural
resources overview.
Nevertheless, a "core" of sources was soon identified
as the most basic research tool for this study. Many still
have not been fully exploited, and they deserve considera-
tion in future investigation of central Nevada's history and
cultural remains.
As mentioned above, Angel (1881) is and has been an
important reference on 19th century Nevada history. Although
factual errors are sometimes evident, and the presentation
is somewhat skewed toward the promotional, Angel's book con-
tains an enormous amount of information about life and
enterprise during the state's first two decades. It is thus
an excellent starting point for study.
Other contemporary sources of utmost importance are
census records, tax records, township survey maps and local
newspapers. Population schedules from state and federal
censuses provide data on people: names, occupations,
national origins, family size, and to a limited extent,
location. They can be used in conjunction with county tax
records to study settlement (even down to individual
175
ranches), immigration, and the region's commerce and
industry. Township survey maps provide information on
transportation systems, settlement and land use, and have
been invaluable in the present study. However, they vary
in date from the 1860's until well into the 20th century,
and thus cannot present a complete picture for any one time
period. Also, mountain regions were seldom surveyed, so much
information on mining camps and other mountain-based
activities is not shown on these maps. Contemporary news-
papers are crucial in the study of local history, but some
are more useful than others. Some, for instance the Eureka
Sentinel , concentrate on local mining, to the exclusion of
much else occurring in the community. Others are more
broad-based, and thus particularly ' useful. One of the best
is the Reese River Reveille , which covered people and events
in many areas of central Nevada. The advertising sections
also provide valuable data on local commerce and business
establishments. City directories (often published as state-
wide or regional directories) are also useful for study of
commerce.
Annual or biennial reports of Nevada state offices are
rich sources of information on many topics. Reports from
the Secretary of State include lists of incorporations filed
each year in the state, most of course being mining com-
panies. However, the lists are in order of filing date,
rather than geographical location, which makes them somewhat
difficult to use. Reports from the Superintendent of Public
Instruction, particularly after 1887, list school districts,
clerks and teachers, and have been of particular use in
studying rural settlement and community institutions. The
Surveyor General's reports, beginning in 1865, include
annual statistics, by county, for industry, agricultural
production, etc. Many also contain reports from county
assessors enlarging upon the statistics and discussing
various aspects of settlement and economic activity. Reports
from the State Engineer (beginning 1903) include lists of
persons applying for irrigation permits. These are not,
however, arranged by county, and often the only locational
information is the name of the creek from which the applicant
wished to draw water. The proposed use of water is listed
in each case, suggesting that these records might be useful
in future study of land use and agricultural activity.
Finally, reports of the Commissioner of Labor, although not
begun until 1915 » contain information on union activities and
the overall condition of employment in the state.
Nineteenth century exploration in central Nevada is
covered in many sources. Goetzmann (1966) discusses
exploration in the context of the entire west, while Cline
(1963) concentrates on exploration in the Great Basin.
176
Because most exploration in central Nevada was under
government auspices, records are many and detailed. The
"Notes on Sources" in Goetzmann (1966) is an excellent
starting point for future study of this topic. Among the
major collections of the National Archives are Record Groups
48 and 57 (Department of Interior, including Geological
Survey) and 77 (Topographical Engineers).
Sources for study of central Nevada's native popula-
tions in the historic period are rather limited. Cor-
respondence and records of the U.S. Office of Indian Affairs ,
and records of the U.S. Army in Nevada form the basic primary
documentation on the subject. Census records contain
information on location of native populations, and often cite
occupation as well. Occasionally local newspapers mention
Indian inhabitants; although the references are usually
derogatory, they do provide insight into the role of native
populations in various local communities. Publications of
the Inter-Tribal Council of Nevada ( 1976a, b,c, 1978) are
useful and interesting references, as is Forbes (1967. 1969).
Ethnographic studies of Great Basin peoples include Steward
(19^1, 1958), Stewart (19^1) and Kroeber (1939).
Other ethnic groups have received varying treatment.
Shepperson (1970) provides a general overview of immigration
and the immigrant experience in Nevada. Italians have been
studied by Grazeola (1969)1 and Earl (I969), the Chinese by
Carter (1975) and Basques by Douglass (1970), Georgetta
(1965, 1972), Sawyer (197D and Shepperson (1970), but most
other immigrant groups have not received attention, except in
passing. One source not tapped in the present study is the
special collection on Basque studies at the University of
Nevada, Reno.
The history of the region's railroads is detailed in
Myrick (1962, 1963) , and Goodwin (1966) provides additional
material on the northern roads. Further study of rail
transportation in central Nevada should include examination
of business records from the Nevada Central, Eureka-
Palisade and Tonopah-Goldf ield railroads, many of which are
available at the Nevada Historical Society, and also con-
temporary newspapers, particularly those from Austin,
Eureka, Battle Mountain and Tonopah.
Among the best sources for the study of toll roads, and
freight and stage lines are contemporary maps, biennial
reports of the state legislature (for toll franchises), city
directories and local newspapers. Hafen (1926) gives a good
account of the Overland Mail, and Lass (1972) provides con-
text for historical development of western freighting,
although his emphasis is on the region east of Salt Lake City,
177
One of the more interesting descriptions of life along the
Pony Express trail is included in Richard Burton's I860
City of the Saints (excerpts reprinted in i960 by the Nevada
Historical Society Quarterly) , and includes useful informa-
tion on the stations themselves.
Although few individual articles have been written
specifically about agriculture in central Nevada, there is a
wealth of material on the state as a whole that includes
information about this particular region. Perhaps the best
study of the western range livestock industry is Claws on
(1950). Of great value are the many publications of the
University of Nevada Agricultural Experiment Station (Reno),
particularly Brennen (1935) 1 Carpenter et al (19^1),
Fleming and Brennen (1937. 19^0), and Hardman and Mason
(19^9). Creel (1964) and Hazeltine et al (I96I) have also
proved useful to the present study. The most recent work on
mustanging is Thomas (1979) • which traces the wild horse
problem and efforts (private and governmental) to deal with
it from the 19th century to the present. The question of
public range management in the West is thoughtfully treated
in Adams (1926), which discusses the situation prevailing in
the early 20th century and offers recommendations that to a
great extent were adopted with the Taylor Grazing Act and
later organization of the Bureau of Land Management. Clawson
(1950) also has several informative chapters on this subject.
Further study of agriculture in central Nevada should
include detailed examination of census and county tax
records. Nineteenth century county assessors' reports
(published through the State Surveyor General) also contain
information about crops and livestock.
The settlement history of central Nevada has received
little scholarly attention. Good places to start are the
county histories of Berg (19^2), Fleischmann (I967) and King
(195^) • Again, census population schedules and county tax
records will be important sources of information, as are the
19th century township survey maps. Further examination of
school district organization (through published reports and,
if available, local records) may also shed light on settle-
ment patterns in the region.
Study of central Nevada's architecture will have to
begin with the buillings and structures themselves. For
buildings in larger towns a good beginning reference is
Stoehr's (1975) book on Colorado mining towns. Among the
growing number of "style" books, Foley (1980) and Rifkind
(1980) are very good, being somewhat broader than others
such as Blumenson (1977) or Whiffen (1969). Concerning the
region's rural architecture, there is almost nothing to be
had, as most publications on this topic deal with states and
178
regions east of the Mississippi River. This trend is
changing, however, as demonstrated by the Minnesota
Historical Society's Minnesota Farmscape: Looking at Change
(1980). It might be worthwhile to consult State Historic
Preservation Offices in states such as Colorado, Montana,
Texas, Wyoming, Utah, Idaho, New Mexico and Arizona to
determine if they have studied rural architecture and if so
how. Published inventories or reports from these states
might also help to put central Nevada's architectural
resources in regional perspective.
There is an enormous amount of information on the mining
West. The question is how to use it. Any further study of
mining in central Nevada should begin with Paul (I963) and
Smith (1967). to obtain an overview of western mining and
Nevada's place within that theme. For specifics, Couch and
Carpenter (19^3) and Lincoln (1923) have long been recognized
as invaluable. For study of Round Mountain, Manhattan and
Natomas , Spence (1980) presents a good account of gold
dredging in the west. The Barnett collection (with accom-
panying text) at the Nevada Historical Society contains an
extraordinarily fine selection of photographs on hydrau-
licking at Round Mountain. Oberbillig (1967) has written a
useful, and well illustrated description of the Washoe and
Reese River processes, Vanderburg (1936) gives a good account
of placer mining in the state, and Nolan (1962) is a good
recent study of Eureka.
Contemporary newspapers provide much detail about mining
and mining enterprises ; because they were written in large
part to lure prospective investors, however, they should be
used with extreme care. Among the best sources of informa-
tion about mining structures are contemporary photographs, of
which the Nevada Historical Society has a very fine
collection. These photographs will show the kinds of struc-
tures originally present at mining and milling sites, and
help future researchers to identify mining remains in the
field.
Perhaps the most reliable source of information on
Nevada mining in the 19th and early 20th centuries is the
professionally-prepared series Mineral Resources West of
the Rocky Mountains , issued by the U.S. Treasury Department
beginning in 1866. They are variously titled, and were
prepared by several authors, for example J. Ross Browne in
1866-1867, Rossiter W. Raymond 1868-1875, and for a period
(1882-1893) were issued as part of annual reports from the
U.S. Geological Survey. The best way to locate these reports
is through the Checklist of U.S. Public Documents, issued by
the Superintendent of Documents.
179
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Adams , Ramon F .
1959 The Rampaging Herd: A Bibliography of Books and
Pamphlets on Men and Events in the Cattle Country.
Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.
Adams, Romanzo C.
1916 Public Range Lands --A New Policy Needed. American
Journal of Sociology 22: 324-351.
Adelberg & Raymond.
1865 Report on the History and Potential of the Nye
County, Nevada Area. . . . Nevada Historical
Society.
Allardt, G. F.
1863 Topographical Map of Reese River Mines and Town of
Austin, Nevada Historical Society.
Allen, Lemuel.
1903 Letter, 11 November 1903» concerning expulsion of
Chinese from Tonopah, Nevada Historical Society.
Allen, Robert A .
Papers. Nevada Historical Society.
Amonette, Hazel.
n.d. A True Story of Eureka. Ms., Nevada Historical Society,
Ancient Order of Hibernians, Austin.
Records. Nevada Historical Society.
Angel, Myron (ed.).
1881 History of Nevada, with Illustrations and
Biographical Sketches of its Prominent Men and
Pioneers. Oakland, Calif.: Thompson and West.
Angus, Ina Miller.
n.d. Toll Roads of Western Nevada. Ms., Nevada
Historical Society.
Arndt, Karl J. R. , and May E. Olson.
1961 Nevada. German-American Newspapers and
Periodicals, 1732-1955- Heidelberg: Quelle and
Meyer: 298-9.
Ashbaugh, Don.
1963 Nevada's Turbulent Yesterday ... A Study in Ghost
Towns. Los Angeles: Westernlore.
180
Austin Consolidated Silver Mines Co., Ltd.
Records 1865-186?. Berkeley.
Austin Literary Association.
Records 1878-1880. Nevada Historical Society.
Austin Manhattan Consolidated Mining Co.
1908 Report on condition and prospects, 14 June 1908.
Nevada Historical Society.
Austin Meat Co., Austin Nev.
Ledger, 1 November 1908-July 191^. University of
Nevada, Reno.
Bailey, E. H. and D. A. Phoenix.
1944 Quicksilver Deposits in Nevada. University of
Nevada Bulletin 38.
Bancroft, Hubert Howe.
1890 History of Nevada, Colorado and Wyoming, 1540-1888.
San Francisco: The History Company.
Barnes, William C.
1913 Western Grazing Grounds and Forest Ranges: A
History of the Livestock Industry as Conducted on
the Open Ranges of the Arid West. Chicago:
Breeder's Gazette.
Barnett, George L.
I969 Hydraulic Mining at Round Mountain. Typed booklet,
to accompany Barnett collection of photographs.
Nevada Historical Society.
Barrenchea, Melody.
1961 Basques in Nevada. Ms., Nevada Historical
Society.
Battle Mountain Mining Co., USA, Ltd.
Records 1869-1879- Berkeley.
Beach, Rex.
1907 Fight at Tonopah. Everybody's Magazine 16:
464-474.
BeDunnah, Gary P.
1966 A History of the Chinese in Nevada: 1855-190^.
Unpublished M.A. Thesis, University of Nevada,
Reno.
181
Beebe, Lucius M. and Charles M. Clegg.
19^9 U.S. West: The Saga of Wells Fargo. New York:
Dutton.
Behm, Anthony J.
n.d. A Story of Growth — Austin I863. Ms., Nevada
Historical Society.
Belaustegui, Delphine.
1931 The True History of My Community. Ms., Nevada
Historical Society.
Belmont, Nevada: A Calico Print Folio, in Calico Print 8:
1952 13-24.
Bender, D. A.
Scrapbook, Carson City 1875-1881. Bancroft.
Benjamin, Israel Joseph.
1956 Israelites in Nevada, in Three Years in America,
1859-1862. Philadelphia: Jewish Publication
Society of America, Vol. II: 206-221.
Berg, Lucile R.
1942 A History of the Tonopah Area and Adjacent Region
of Central Nevada, 1827-1941. Unpublished M.A.
Thesis, University of Nevada, Reno.
Berlin Miners ' Union.
1902 Letter, 25 June 1902. Nevada Historical Society.
Bianchi, Ron.
n.d. Biography of Miss Eliza Pierce of Battle Mountain,
Nevada. Nevada Historical Society.
Blatchly, A.
1867 Mining and Milling in the Reese River Region of
Central and Southeastern Nevada. New York: Slate
and Jones .
Blatchly, A. et. al.
1865 The Silver Districts of Nevada. New York:
William C. Bryant & Co. , printers.
Bleak, Hames Godson.
n.d. Annals of the Southern Utah Mission 1847-1900.
Ms . , Bancroft.
Blossom, John Ansel.
n.d. Battle Mountain Nevada. Ms., Bancroft.
182
B lumens on, John J.-G.
1977 Identifying American Architecture: A Pictorial
Guide to Styles and Terms, 1600-19^-5. Nashville:
American Association for State and Local History.
Boak, Cada Castolas.
Correspondence and Papers, 1902-1908. Nevada
Historical Society.
Boni, Mary.
n.d. Historic Landmarks in My Vicinity. Ms., Nevada
Historical Society.
Bonwick, James.
1872 The Mormons and the Silver Mines. London: Hodder
and Stoughton.
Bowles, Samuel.
1865 Across the Continent. Springfield, Mass.: Samuel
Bowles & Co.
Brackett, A. G.
1869 Nevada and the Silver Mines. The Western Monthly
1:235.
Bradford and Bradford.
1905 Map of Tonopah Mining District. University of
Nevada, Reno.
Bradley, Lewis Rice.
n.d. Biographical Notes. Ms., Bancroft.
Bradley, Thelma.
1959 Episcopal Churches in Nevada. Ms., (includes
research notes), Nevada Historical Society.
Brayer, Herbert 0.
1949 The Influence of British Capital on the Western
Range-Cattle Industry. Tasks of Economic History,
Supplement IX.
Brennen, C . A .
1935 The Public Range and the Livestock Industry of
Nevada. University of Nevada Agricultural
Experiment Station Bulletin #139.
Burkhart, J. A.
1952 The Frontier Merchant and Social History.
Montana Magazine of History 2:5-15-
British Nevada Syndicate, Ltd.
Records 1907-1946. Bancroft.
183
Brown, Harold Nicholas.
1935 History of Elementary Education in Nevada, 1861-
1934. Ed.D. Dissertation, University of California,
Berkeley.
Brown, Mark H. and W. R. Felton.
1956 Before Barbed Wire. New York: Holt, Rinehart &
Winston.
Brown, Ronald.
1975 A Social History of Hard Rock Mining. Ph.D.
Dissertation, University of Illinois, Urbana.
Browne, Howard E.
1918 The Political Township in Nevada. Monograph,
Nevada Historical Society.
Browne, J. Ross.
1866 Reese River Country. Harper's Monthly Magazine
33: 26-44.
Browne, J. Ross.
1867 A Report on the Mineral Resources of the States
and Territories West of the Rocky Mountains [for
the year 1866]. Washington: Government Printing
Office.
Browne, J. Ross.
1868 Mineral Resources of the States and Territories
West of the Rocky Mountains [for the year I867] .
Washington: Government Printing Office.
Browne, Lina Fergusson (ed.).
1969 J. Ross Browne: His Letters, Journals and
Writings. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico
Press.
Bruner, Evelyn.
1961 History of lone Valley. Ms., Nevada Historical
Society.
Burgess , J. A .
1909 The Geology of the Producing Part of the Tonopah
Mining District. Economic Geology 4: 681-712.
Burton, Sir Richard.
i960 Excerpt from City of the Saints , in Nevada
Historical Quarterly 3(2) : 7-35.
Carlson, Helen Swisher.
1959 Nevada Place Names: Origin and Meaning. Ph.D.
Dissertation, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.
184
Carpenter, G. Alvin, Marion Clawson and C. E. Fleming.
19^-1 Ranch Organization and Operation in Northeastern
Nevada. University of Nevada Agricultural
Experiment Station Bulletin 156.
Carpenter, Jay A., et al.
1953 The History of 50 Years of Mining at Tonopah, 1900-
1950. University of Nevada Geology and Mining
Series 51-
Carter, Gregg Lee.
1975 Social Demography of the Chinese in Nevada: 1870-
1880. Nevada Historical Society Quarterly 18:
72-89.
Central Pacific Railroad.
1875 Railroad Lands in California, Nevada and Utah.
San Francisco. Bancroft.
Charles Hall Page & Associates, Inc.
1978 Procedures Manual for Compiling a Statewide
Inventory of Cultural Resources. Prepared for the
Nevada Department of Conservation and National
Resources, and the Division of Historic Preserva-
tion and Archaeology.
Charter Oak and Corn Exchange Claims, Lander County.
1865 Report. Nevada Historical Society.
Clark, Walter Van Tilburg (ed.).
1973 The Journals of Alfred Doten, 18^9-1903- Reno:
University of Nevada Press.
Clawson, Marion.
1950 The Western Range Livestock Industry. New York:
McGraw-Hill.
Cleland, Robert G.
1950 This Reckless Breed of Men: The Trappers and Fur
Traders of the Southwest. New York:
Clifford, Susan.
1959 Tonopah, Ellendale, and Clifford. Ms., Nevada
Historical Society.'
Cline, Gloria Griffin.
I963 Exploring the Great Basin. Norman: University of
Oklahoma Press.
Cochran, Chester.
n.d. An Old Settler's Story of Manhattan, Nevada.
Ms., Nevada Historical Society.
185
Cogswell, William W.
Business Records and Correspondence, 1908-1923-
Nevada Historical Society.
Comfort, H. G. (comp.)
1941 Camera Shots of Ghost Cities of California and
Nevada. Photos by Bill Rogers. Shafter, Calif.:
Shafter Press.
Connor, L. G.
1921 A Brief History of the Sheep Industry in the U.S.
American Historical Association Annual Report for
1918. Washington, D.C.
Cornwell, H. R.
1972 Geology and Mineral Deposits of Southern Nye
County, Nevada. Nevada Bureau of Mines and
Geology, Bulletin 77-
Cortez Mines, Ltd.
Records I888-I896. Bancroft.
Couch, Bertrand F. and Jay A . Carpenter.
19^3 Nevada's Metal and Mineral Production (1859-1940,
Inclusive). University of Nevada Geology and Mining
Series 38.
Creel, Cecil W.
1927 Agricultural Nevada. Nevada Newsletter 21:
69-70, 93, 95, 98.
Creel, Cecil.
1964 History of Agriculture in Nevada. Max C. F.leishmann
College of Agriculture, University of Nevada, Reno.
Crofut, Andrew D.
1970 Diamond Valley Dust. University of Nevada Oral
History Project, Reno.
Dale, Edward E.
I960 The Range Cattle Industry. Norman: University of
Oklahoma Press.
Dana, Samuel T.
1956 Forest and Range Policy: Its Development in the
United States. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Danhof, Ralph H.
1943 The Accommodation and Integration of Conflicting
Cultures in a Newly Established Community.
American Journal of Sociology 49: 14-23.
186
Davis, Samuel P. (ed.).
1913 The History of Nevada. Reno: Elms Publishing
Co.
Delvaille, G. C.
1954 A Brochure Depicting the Deterioration of the
Business Activity of the Nevada Division of the
California Electric Power Company. Nevada
Historical Society.
Dennett, Muessig & Associates, Ltd.
1979 Historical and Architectural Descriptions of
Selected Sites in and around Montour, Idaho.
Report prepared for U.S. Department of the
Interior, Bureau of Reclamation, Boise, Idaho.
Dieringer Family.
Papers, 1884-1940. Nevada Historical Society.
Dinsmore Brothers .
Business Papers, Austin, Nevada, 1869-1874.
Bancroft.
Dobie, J. Frank.
1934 The Mustangs. Boston: Little, Brown.
Doten, Alfred.
Diaries and Papers 1849-1903. University of
Nevada (Includes photographs).
Douglass, William A.
1970 The Basques of the American West: Preliminary
Historical Perspectives, Nevada Historical Society
Quarterly 13 (4): 12-25-
Earl, Phillip I.
I969 Nevada's Italian War. Nevada Historical Society
Quarterly 12 (2): 47-87.
Eitel, Edward D.
1909 County Atlas of California and Nevada. San
Francisco. Bancroft.
Elliott, Russell R.
1973 History of Nevada. Lincoln: University of
Nebraska Press.
Elliott, Russell R.
1965 Nevada's 20th Century Mining Boom: Tonopah-
Goldfield-Ely. Carson City: University of Nevada
Press .
187
Emmons, William H.
1910 A Reconnaissance of Some Mining Camps in Elko,
Lander and Eureka Counties, Nevada. U.S.G.S.
Bulletin #408. Washington, D.C . : Government
Printing Office.
Ericson, Robert Edward.
1970 Touring Entertainment in Nevada during the Peak
Years of the Mining Boom, 187_-1878. Ph.D.
Dissertation, University of Oregon, Eugene.
Eureka Nevada Railway Co.
Daily Service Record, 1936. Bancroft.
Eureka Nevada Silver Mining Co. , Ltd.
Records 1880-1905. Bancroft.
Eureka and Palisade Railroad.
Records 1873-1938. University of Nevada.
Eureka County, Nevada, Assessor.
Assessment Rolls, 1891-1892. Nevada State Archives .
Eureka People Place Great Faith in Ruby Hill Mines.
1950 Nevada Highways and Parks 10: 22-31.
Ewing, Dana.
1959 Tonopah. Ms., Photos., Nevada Historical
Society.
Extinct Towns .
19,53 Nevada Highways and Parks 1: 26-31.
Farrell, Michael Joseph.
1885 Letters, Austin, Nevada. Bancroft.
Parish, John B.
1910 Report on the Properties of the Tybo Consolidated
Mining Co, October 24, 1910. Nevada Historical
Society.
Ferguson, Henry G.
1929 Mining Districts of Nevada. Economic Geology
24: 115-148.
Fife, A. E. and J. M. Fife.
19^8 Hay Derricks of the Great Basin and Upper Snake
River Valley. Western Folklore 7(3): 225-239.
Fife, William.
1912 The Ownership of Nevada Land. Incomplete M.A.
thesis, Nevada Historical Society.
188
F inlay, John.
1903 Tonopah. Overland Monthly 41: 69-74.
Fleming, C. E. and C. A. Brennen.
1937 Studies of the Range Sheep Business in Nevada.
University of Nevada Agricultural Experiment
Station Bulletin #145.
Fleming, Charles E. and C. A. Brennen.
1940 Range Sheep Production in Northeastern Nevada;
Production and Earning Power 1933-1938; Inclusive
Long-Time Situation, 1910-1938. University of
Nevada Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin
#151.
Fletcher, Fred Nathaniel.
1917 The Trappers and Explorers of the Great Basin.
Nevada Historical Society Papers 2: 208-232.
Foley, Mary Mix.
1980 The American House. New York: Harper and Row.
Forbes, Jack D. (ed.).
I967 Nevada Indians Speak. Reno: University of Nevada
Press .
Forbes, Jack D.
I969 Native Americans of California and Nevada.
Healdsburg, California: Naturegraph Publications.
Forbes-Lindsay, Charles Harcourt.
1908 Reclaiming the Desert: The Transformation of
Arid Lands into Farms and Homes, Craftsman 15:
573-584.
Force, Edwin Truesdell.
1933 The Counties of Nevada: Organization and Signifi-
cance, 184-9-1873. Unpublished M.A. Thesis,
University of California, Berkeley.
Francis, W. G.
1909- Business Records, Austin.
Freemasons, Belmont, Nevada.
Records 1873-1880. Nevada Historical Society.
Pricks tad, Walter Nettleton, and Edward W. Thrall.
1958 A Century of Nevada Post Offices, 1852-1957.
Oakland, Calif.: Pacific Rotaprinting Co.
189
Frink, Maurice, et. al.
1956 When Grass Was King: Contributions to the Study of
the Range Cattle Industry. Boulder: University of
Colorado .
Gabbs .
1955 Nevada Highways and Parks 15: 2 8-31.
Gaw, Robert B.
1956 A Study of Problems Arising from the Transition
from Local School Districts in the State of Nevada.
Unpublished M.A. Thesis, University of Nevada,
Reno.
Gayer , James .
n.d. Historic Landmarks, Old National. Ms. Nevada
Historical Society.
Georgetta, Clel.
I965 Sheep in Nevada. Nevada Historical Society
Quarterly 8: 1^-38.
Georgetta, Clel.
1972 Golden Fleece in Nevada. Reno: Venture Publishing
Co. , Ltd.
Gianella, Vincent P.
19^-5 Bibliography of Geologic Literature of Nevada.
University of Nevada Bulletin 39(6).
Gillis, William R. (comp.)
1868 The Nevada Directory for I868-69. San Francisco:
M. D. Carr and Co., printers.
Gilluly, James and Harold Masursky.
1965 Geology of the Cortez Quadrangle, Nevada. in
D. R. Mabey, Gravity and Aeromagnetic Surveys .
U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1175.
Glass , Mary Ellen.
1964 Water for Nevada: The Reclamation Controversy,
1885-1902. Reno: University of Nevada Press.
Glass, Mary Ellen.
I969 Silver and Politics in Nevada, 1852-1902. Reno:
University of Nevada Press.
Goetzmann, William H.
1966 Exploration and Empire: The Explorer and Scientist
in the Winning of the West. New York: Vintage Books.
190
Gold Canyon Mining District.
Records I863-I906. Nevada Historical Society.
Goodwin, V. 0.
I966 The Humboldt-Nevada 's Desert River and Thoroughfare
of the American West. U.S. Department of
Agriculture—Nevada. Humboldt River Basin Survey.
Gray, R. Guild.
19^8 Public School Finance in Nevada. M.A. Thesis,
University of Nevada, Reno.
Grazeola, Franklin.
1969 The Charcoal Burners' War of 1879: A Study of the
Italian Immigrant in Nevada. M.A. Thesis,
University of Nevada, Reno.
Greever, William S.
1963 The Bonanza West. Norman: University of Oklahoma
Press .
Grey, Jessie.
Letters, 1889-1891. Nevada Historical Society.
Guisti, Frank.
Belmont. Ms., Nevada Historical Society.
Hafen, LeRoy.
1926 The Overland Mail. Cleveland: A. H. Clark.
Hague , James D .
1870 Mining Industry. Volume 3 of Clarence King (ed.)
United States Geological Exploration of the
Fortieth Parallel. Washington, D.C.: The War
Department, Professional Papers 18. U.S. Govern-
ment Printing Office.
Hamlin, Alfred Street.
1919 The Federal Policy in Relation to the Nevada
Indian. M.A. Thesis, University of California,
Berkeley.
Hancock, John.
1909 Mining and Other Resources of Eureka County,
Nevada. Nevada Historical Society.
Hardmann, George and Howard G. Mason.
19^9 Irrigated Lands of Nevada. University of
Nevada Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin
#183.
191
Harrington's Directory of the City of Austin . . . with a
1866 Historical and Statistical Review of Austin and
the Reese River Mining District by Myron Angel.
Austin: [W. P. Harrington].
Harris, Elmer E.
1907 The New West: A Social Study of Life in Nevada
Towns Today. Sunset 18: 296-298.
Hazeltine, B., C. Saulisberry and H. Taylor.
1961 A Range History of Nevada. American Society of
Range Management, Nevada Section. Annual Meeting,
Salt Lake City, Utah.
Hedrick, Harry.
1906 The Newest Manhattan. Sunset 17: 258-262.
Henriques , (The Rev.) Hoyt E.
Diaries. 1907-19^3- Nevada Historical Society.
Hill, James M.
1912 The Mining Districts of the Western United States.
U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 507.
Hill, James M.
1915 Some Mining Districts in Northeastern California
and Northwestern Nevada. U.S. Geological Survey
Bulletin 59^.
Historical Records Survey.
19^1 Inventory of the Church Archives of Nevada:
Protestant Episcopal Church. Reno: Historical
Records Survey.
Historical Records Survey.
1939 Inventory of the Church Archives of Nevada: Roman
Catholic Church. Reno: Historical Records
Survey.
Hodge, Frederick W. (ed.)
1912 Handbook of American Indians North of Mexico
(2 Vols.). Washington, D.C.
Holderman, Orville.
1963 Jewett W. Adams and W. N. McGill: Their Lives
and Ranching Empire. M.A. Thesis, University of
Nevada, Reno.
Hood, William Henry.
Medical Notebook, business records, etc. from
practice in Battle Mountain. Nevada Historical
Society.
192
Horton, R. C.
1963 An Inventory of Barite Occurrence in Nevada.
Nevada Bureau of Mines and Geology b .
Horton, R. C.
1962 An Inventory of Fluorspar Occurrences in Nevada.
Nevada Bureau of Mines and Geology 1.
Houghton, Ruth M. and Leontine Nappe (eds.)
1977 Nevada Lifestyles and Lands. Reno: Bureau of
Governmental Research, University of Nevada.
Huf faker, Granville W.
1883 Early Cattle Trade of Nevada. Ms. Nevada
Historical Society.
Hug, Proctor R.
19^ The Development of the High School in Nevada. M.A.
Thesis, University of Nevada, Reno.
Ingalls , Nena.
n.d. Historic Landmarks in My Vicinity. Ms.
Nevada Historical Society.
Inter-Tribal Council of Nevada.
1976a Newe: A Western Shoshone History. Salt Lake City:
University of Utah Printing Services.
Inter-Tribal Council of Nevada.
1976b Numa: A Northern Paiute History. Salt Lake City:
University of Utah Printing Services.
Inter-Tribal Council of Nevada.
1976c Nuwuvi: A Southern Paiute History. Salt Lake
City: University of Utah Printing Services.
Inter-Tribal Council of Nevada.
1978 Nevada History: The Nevada Indian Perspective.
Typescript, University of Nevada, Reno.
lone (Nev.) Silver Mines, Ltd.
Records 1888-1892. Bancroft.
Jackson, W. Turrentine.
I965 Wagon Roads West. (Revised Edition.) New Haven:
Yale University Press.
Johnson, Hiram.
Correspondence, Papers and Business Records, 1879-
I887. Nevada Historical Society.
193
Johnson, M. G.
1973 Placer Gold Deposits of Nevada. U.S. Geological
Survey Bulletin 1356.
Joseph, Morris H.
The Mines and Resources of Eureka County,
Nevada. Holograph, c. 1900, Nevada Historical
Society.
King, Buster L.
195^ The History of Lander County, Nevada. M.A. Thesis,
University of Nevada, Reno.
Kneiss, Gilbert H.
195^+ Bonanza Railroads. (4-th Rev. Edition). Stanford:
Stanford University Press.
Knight, Oliver.
1973 Toward an Understanding of the Western Town.
Western Historical Quarterly, January, 1973-
Koschmann, A. H. and M. H. Bergendahl.
1968 Principal Gold Producing Districts of the United
States. U.S. Geological Survey Professional
Paper 610 (I968). Washington, D.C.: Government
Printing Office.
Krai, V. E.
1951 Mineral Resources of Nye County. University of
Nevada Bulletin.
Kroeber, Alfred L.
1939 Cultural and Natural Areas of Native North America.
Berkeley: University of California Press.
Kupper, Winifred.
19^5 The Golden Hoof. New York: Knopf.
Kusunoki, Tom.
1961 The Peterson Ranch. Ms. Nevada Historical
Society.
Laiola, Paul Robert.
19^1 An Analysis of Nevada Banks Duiing the Period
193^-194-0. m,a. Thesis, University of Nevada,
Reno.
Land, William C .
1888 The Cattle Industry in Arizona, New Mexico,
Idaho and Nevada. Typescript, Bancroft.
194
Lander County, Nevada, Assessor.
Assessment Rolls 1891-92. Nevada State Archives.
Lander County, Nevada.
Cortez Mining District. Claims, 1863-191^.
University of Nevada, Reno.
Lander County, Nevada, Recorder.
Lander County Records, Books 19-24- (February 9,
1864-May 10, 1865). University of Nevada, Reno.
Lander County, Nevada.
Reese River Mining District. Records, Books D-E,
1863-64. University of Nevada, Reno.
Las s , W . E .
1972 From the Missouri to the Great Salt Lake: An
Account of Overland Freighting. Lincoln:
Nebraska State Historical Society.
Lawrence, E. I.
I963 Antimony Deposits of Nevada. Nevada Bureau of
Mines and Geology Bulletin 61.
Lewis, Marvin.
1970 Hot Creek and the Wide Gray Valley. Nevada
Historical Society Quarterly 13(2): kl-5k.
Lincoln, Francis Church.
1923 Mining Districts and Mineral Resources of Nevada.
Reno: Nevada Newsletter Publishing Co.
Lincoln, F. C. and R. C. Horton.
Outline of Nevada Mining History, 1855-1923,
1924-1964. Nevada Bureau of Mines, Report #7.
Lincoln Highway Association.
1935 The Lincoln Highway. New York: Dodd, Mead.
Lingenf elter , Richard E.
1974 The Hardrock Miners: A History of the Mining Labor
Movement in the American West, 1863-1893.
Berkeley: University of California Press.
Long, Walter S .
Sketchbooks (1870's, Eureka area). University of
Nevada, Reno.
Malin, James C .
I967 The Grassland of North America. Gloucester,
Massachusetts: Peter Smith.
195
Manhattan Gold Dredging Project . . . Making New Nevada
History, Nevada Magazine 2: 29-32.
Manhattan Consolidated Gold and Silver Mines, Ltd.
Records, 1887-1892. Bancroft.
Manhattan Freehold Gold and Silver Mining Co., Ltd.
Records 1885-189^. Bancroft.
Manhattan, Nevada.
1906 Scrapbook. Nevada Historical Society.
Manhattan Silver Mining Co. of Nevada.
Correspondence and Papers I863-I887. Bancroft.
Mathews , James G . and C o .
1889 Austin, Nevada. Assay Book. University of
Nevada, Reno.
Maupin, Michcn.
1961 From Trails to Freeways. Ms. Nevada Historical
Society.
McCourt, Thomas.
Battle Mountain, Nevada. Account Book, 1895-1905 .
University of Nevada.
McKee, Harley J.
1973 Introduction to Early American Masonry.
Washington, D.C.: National Trust for Historic
Preservation.
McKenney, L. M.
1877 Business Directory of San Francisco and Principal
Towns of California and Nevada. San Francisco.
McKenney, L. M.
1881 Pacific Coast Directory, 1880-1881. San
Francisco.
McNeely, James.
1931 Historical Landmarks. Ms. Nevada Historical
Society.
McNeely, John T.
1898 The Cattle Industry of Colorado, Wyoming and
Nevada, and the Sheep Industry in Colorado, in
1897. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Bureau
of Animal Industry, Annual Report 15: 377-381.
196
Mellinger, Philip J.
1971 Frontier Camp to Small Town: A Study of
Community Development. Annals of Wyoming (Fall,
1971).
Merrifield, Robert Brent.
1957 Nevada 1859-1881: The Impact of an Advanced
Technological Society upon a Frontier Area. Ph.D.
Dissertation, University of Chicago.
Merrill, George Whitney.
1887 Biography of George Whitney Merrill. San Francisco.
Bancroft.
Miller, Eunice.
1926 The Timber Resources of Nevada. Nevada Historical
Society Papers 5: 375-^57-
Miner, H. Craig.
The Corporation and the Indian: Tribal
Sovereignty and Industrial Civilization in Indian
Territory, 1865-1907. Columbia: University of
Missouri Press.
Minnesota Historical Society.
1980 Minnesota Farmscape: Looking at Change. St. Paul:
Minnesota Historical Society.
Mordy, B. D. and D. L. McCaughey.
I968 Nevada Historical Sites. Reno: Desert Research
Institute.
Molinelli, Lambert, & Co.
1879 Eureka and its Resources, a Complete History of
Eureka County, Nevada . . . San Francisco: H.
Keller & Co.
Monroe, Alonzo.
Letters to wife, Ann, I863-I869. Nevada Historical
Society.
Moore, Lyman.
1971 Economic Evaluation of California-Nevada Iron
Resources and Iron 'Ore Markets. U.S. Bureau of
Mines Information Circular 8511.
Morrissey, F. R.
1968 Turquoise Deposits of Nevada. Nevada Bureau of
Mines and Geology Report 17.
197
Mulloy, William T.
1938 Groups of Central and Southern Nevada, in
Willard Z. Park et al. Tribal Distribution in
the Great Basin. American Anthropologist 40:
630-632.
Murdoch, George P.
1941 Enthnographic Bibliography of North America.
New Haven: Yale University Press.
Myrick, David F .
1962 Railroads of Nevada and Eastern California. Vol.
I: The Northern Roads. Berkeley: Howell-North
Books .
Mynch,
1963 Railroads at Nevada and Eastern California. Vol.
II: The Southern Roads. Berkeley: Howell-North
Books .
Nason, Allura.
1964 The Basques: Sheepmen of the West. M.A. Thesis,
University of Nevada, Reno.
Nevada Central Railroad Co.
Business Records, 1880-1890. University of Nevada.
Nevada Farm Prices, 1920-1945.
1946 Reno: Nevada Agricultural Experiment Station.
Nevada Federation of Women's Clubs.
Correspondence . . . Records . . . Publications,
1913-1972. Nevada Historical Society.
Nevada. Office of the Labor Commissioner.
Biennial Reports .
Nevada. Secretary of State.
Biennial Reports 1865-
Nevada State Association of Architects.
Records, Papers and Correspondence, 1939-1950.
Nevada Historical Society.
Nevada. State Bank Examiner.
Biennial Reports, 1908-1944.
Nevada. State Board of Agriculture.
Biennial Reports, 1885-
198
Nevada State Cattle Association.
Beaver to Beef. Carson City: Nevada State Cattle
Association, 19^9.
Nevada. State Engineer.
Biennial Reports, 1903/0^.
Nevada. Superintendent of Public Instruction.
Biennial Reports 1865-
Nevada. Surveyor General and State Land Register.
Annual Reports 1865-1890.
Nevada, University of.
1935 College of Agriculture, Agricultural Extension
Service. Annual Narrative Reports of Extension
Activities by County Farm Bureaus.
Nevada from Dirt Roads to Divided Paved Four Lanes.
1953 Nevada Highways and Parks 13: 3-30.
Nevada's Agricultural Industry.
1939 Nevada Highways and Parks k: 1-17.
Nevada's Ranges Produce High Quality Food Animals,
19^7 Nevada Highways and Parks 7: 3-17.
Newman, Linda.
1969 Early Public Libraries of Nevada. Research ms . ,
University of Nevada, Reno.
Nolam, Thomas B.
1962 The Eureka Mining District, Nevada (in cooperation
with the Nevada State Bureau of Mines), U.S.G.S.
Professional Papers #^06. Washington, D.C.:
Government Printing Office.
Norcross, Charles A.
1911 Agricultural Nevada. San Francisco: Sunset
Magazine Homeseekers Bureau.
Norcross, Charles A.
191^ Dairying in Nevada . . . Nevada Bureau of Industry,
Agriculture and Irrigation Bulletin 9.
Nye County, Nevada, Assessor.
Assessment Rolls, 1891-1892. Nevada State Archives.
Nye County, Nevada, Fairplay Mining District.
Mining Records, Books C & E, 1905-1909. University
of Nevada, Reno.
199
Nye County, Nevada, Livestock Brand Records 1913-1922.
Nevada Historical Society.
Nye County, Nevada. Records, Papers and Correspondence,
1865-1949. Nevada Historical Society.
Nye County, Nevada. Union Mining District.
Records 1875-189^. University of Nevada, Reno.
Oberbillig, Ernest.
I967 Development of Washoe and Reese River Silver
Processes, Nevada Historical Society Quarterly 10:
6-^3.
'Neill, James A .
1976 Charcoal Industry of the West. Typescript.
Order of the Eastern Star, Austin, Nevada.
Electra Chapter #2, Records, 190^-1936. Nevada
Historical Society.
Overland Stage Line.
Letters and Papers, 1856-64. Nevada Historical
Society.
Palmer, William R.
1958 Early Day Trading with Nevada Mining Camps.
Utah Historical Quarterly 26: 353-368.
Paul, Rodman Wilson.
I963 Mining Frontiers of the Far West. New York:
Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Pelzer, Louis.
1936 The Cattleman's Frontier, 1850-1890. Glendale,
Calif. : A. H. Clark.
Peters, Lillian B.
1947 Settlement Patterns of Nevada. M.A. Thesis,
University of Chicago.
Peterson, Richard H.
1977 The Bonanza Kings: The Social Origins and Business
Behavior of Western Mining Entrepreneurs, 1870-
1900. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
Pittsburgh Consolidated Gold Mines, Ltd.
Records I887-I892. Bancroft.
Polk, R. L.
1908 R. L. Polk's Nevada State Gazetteer and Business
Directory, 1907-1908.
200
Powell, J. W. and G. W. Ingalls .
1873 Report, 18 December 1863. In Annual Report of the
Commissioner for Indian Affairs .
Ranching and Cattle Growing. Ms., n.a., Nevada Historical
n.d. Society.
Rand, McNally & Co.
1885 Indexed Atlas of the World. Chicago: Continental
Publishing Co.
Reese River Reveille.
Special Industrial and Mining Number, January 1910.
Reese River Silver Mining Co. , Ltd.
Records 1865-1883 .. Bancroft.
Reichman, Frederick W.
1967 Early History of Eureka County, Nevada I863-I89O.
M.A. Thesis, University of Nevada, Reno.
Rice, C. T.
1906 Tonopah, Nevada. Engineering and Mining Journal
82: 106.
Rifkind, Carole.
1980 A Field Guide to American Architecture. New York:
New American Library.
Roberts, R. J. and D. C. Arnold.
1965 Ore Deposits of the Antler Peak Quadrangle,
Humboldt and Lander Counties, Nevada. U.S.
Geological Survey Professional Paper ^59B.
Roberts, R. J., K. M. Montgomery, and R. E. Lehner.
I967 Geology and Mineral Resources of Eureka County,
Nevada. Nevada Bureau of Mines and Geology
Bulletin 6k.
Robertson, Frank Chester and Beth Kay Harris.
1962 Boom Towns of the Great Basin. Denver: Sage
Books .
Rocha, Guy Louis.
1977 Radical Labor Struggles in the Tonopah-Goldf ield
Mining District, 1901-1922. Nevada Historical
Society Quarterly 20(1): 3-^5.
201
Ross, Clyde P.
n.d. The Geology and Ore Deposits of Reese River
District, Lander County, Nevada; Geologic Study
of One of Old Bonanza Silver Camps. U.S.G.S.
Bulletin, #997- Washington, D.C.: Government
Printing Office.
Ross, Silas E.
1957 A Directory of Nevada Medical Practitioners Past
and Present.
Round Mountain Banking Corporation.
Records and Papers, 1907-1911. Nevada Historical
Society.
Ruby Hill Railroad Co.
1879 Annual Report, University of Nevada, Reno.
Ruhlen, George.
1964 Early Nevada Forts. Nevada Historical Society
Quarterly 7- 7-63.
Sadler, Reinhold.
Papers. Nevada Historical Society.
Sargent, Charles S.
1879 The Forests of Central Nevada. American Journal
of Science and Arts (3rd Series), Vol. 17. No. 102
^17-^29.
Sawyer, Byrd Wall.
1971 Nevada Nomads: A Story of the Sheep Industry.
San Jose: Harlan-Young Press.
Shannon, Fred A .
19^5 The Farmers' Last Frontier. (Economic History of
the United States). New York: Farrar and
Rinehart.
Shaw, E. J. and P. Shaw.
Papers and Correspondence, 1907-191^. Nevada
Historical Society.
Shawe, F. R., Reeves, R. G. and V. E. Krai.
1962 Iron Ore Deposits of Northern Nevada. Nevada
Bureau of Mines and Geology, Bulletin 53C .
Shepperson, Wilbur Stanley.
1970 Restless Strangers: Nevada's Immigrants and their
Interpreters. Reno: University of Nevada Press.
202
Shields, Fred.
1933 Research Notes for Banking in Nevada ... A
History, Nevada Historical Society.
Shields, Fred.
1953 Banking in Nevada ... A History. Ms. prepared
for First National Bank of Reno. Nevada Historical
Society.
Shinn, Charles Howard.
1965 Mining Camps: A Study in American Frontier
Government. New York: Harper Torchbooks .
Shirley, James Quincy.
1885 Recollections. Bancroft.
Short, Shelton H.
1965 A History of the Nevada Livestock Industry Prior
to 1900. M.A. Thesis, University of Nevada, Reno.
Silver Star Mining Co., Ltd.
Records 1871-1884. Bancroft.
Simpson, James H.
I876 Report of Explorations Across the Great Basin of
the Territory of Utah for a Direct Wagon-Route
from Camp Floyd to Genoa, in Carson Valley in
1859- Washington, D.C.: Government Printing
Office.
Smart, George W.
1958 Mission to Nevada. Ph.D. Dissertation, Central
Baptist Theological Seminary.
Smith, Duane A .
1967 Rocky Mountain Mining Camps. Lincoln: University
of Nebraska Press.
Smith, Rodney.
1963 Austin, Nevada, 1862-1881. M.A. Thesis, University
of Nevada, Reno.
Smith, Wells C .
19^-9 Battle Mountain. Nevada Magazine 4: 23-29.
Smythe, William Ellsworth.
1905 The Conquest of Arid America. New and Revised
Edition. New York: McMillan Co.
203
Spaulding, Franklin Spencer.
Incomplete Journal, 1905-19H- Nevada Historical
Society.
S pence, Clark C .
1958 British Investments and the American Mining
Frontier, 1860-1901. Ithaca, New York: Cornell
University Press for the American Historical
Association.
S pence, Clark C .
1980 The Golden Age of Dredging: The Development of an
Industry and its Environmental Impact. Western
Historical Quarterly 11(4): 401-414.
Stager, Harold K.l
1977 Mineral Deposits, in Geology and Mineral Deposits
of Lander County. Nevada Bureau of Mines and
Geology, Bulletin 88.
Steward, Julian Haynes .
1941 Culture Element Distributions: 13 . Nevada
Shoshoni. Anthropological Records 4(2): 209-359.
Steward, Julian H.
1958 Basin-Plateau Sociopolitical Groups. Washington,
D.C.
Stewart, Omer Call.
1941 Culture Element Distributions: 14. Northern
Paiute. Anthropological Records 4(2) : 361-446.
Stoehr, C. Eric.
1975 Bonanza Victorian: Architecture and Society in
Colorado Mining Towns. Albuquerque: University of
New Mexico Press.
Stokes, Anson Phelps.
Papers. Nevada Historical Society.
Stokes Family.
Letters, Correspondence and Business Records,
1875-1949. Nevada Historical Society.
Tagert, F. G.
n.d. Notes and Map on the History of the Pony Express
and Location of Nevada Stations. Ms., Nevada
Historical Society.
Tagert, Irene.
1949 Incredible Austin. Nevada Magazine 4: 1-14, 30.
204
Tallman, S. and Co., Belmont, Nevada. Records 1875-1879.
Nevada Historical Society.
Thomas, David H.
Historic and Prehistoric Land-Use Patterns at
Reese River. Nevada Historical Society Quarterly
14 (4): 3-10.
Thomas, Heather Smith.
1979 The Wild Horse Controversy. S. Brunswick and New
York: A. S. Barnes & Co.
Thompson & West.
1876 Map of the States of California and Nevada . . .
San Francisco. Bancroft.
Todd, Arthus Cecil.
1967 The Cornish Miner in America. Truro, England and
Glendale, California: D. Bradford Barton, Ltd.,
and Arthur H. Clark Co.
Tonopah and Goldfield Railraod, Philadelphia.
Business Records and Papers, 1904-1949. Nevada
Historical Society.
Torrence, Carl W.
19^4 The History of Masonry in Nevada. Reno: published
for the Grand Lodge F&AM of Nevada by Carlisle.
Towne, Charles W. and Edward N. Wentworth.
1945 Shepherd's Empire. Norman: University of
Oklahoma Press .
Townley, John M.
1976 Reclamation in Nevada, 1850-1904. Ph.D.
Dissertation, University of Nevada, Reno.
Trengove, R. R.
1959 Reconnaissance of Nevada Manganese Deposits.
U.S. Bureau of Mines, Report of Investigations
5446.
Trenholm, Virginia C. and Maurine Carley.
1964 The Shoshonis: Sentinels of the Rockies. Norman:
University of Oklahoma Press.
Trewartha, Glenn T.
1948 Some Regional Characteristics of American
Farmsteads. Annals of the Association of
American Geographers 38( 3) • 169-225-
205
Trout, Alice Frances.
1916 Religious Development in Nevada. M.A. Thesis,
University of Nevada, Reno. (Also in Nevada
Historical Society Papers 1 (1913-1916), 143-167).
Truett, Velma Stevens.
Correspondence and Papers, I9OI-I967. Nevada
Historical Society.
Tybo Consolidated Mining Co., Ltd.
Records 1874-1876. Bancroft.
Tybo Literary Society.
Records I876-I88I. Nevada- Historical Society.
U.S. Army. Nevada.
Records I858-I899. Nevada Historical Society.
U.S. Army. Corps of Engineers.
1875 Preliminary Report upon a Reconnaissance through
Southern and Southeastern Nevada, made in 1869 by
George M. Wheeler. Washington: U.S. Government
Printing Office.
U.S. Bureau of the Census.
9th, 10th, 11th, 12th Censuses.
U.S. Department of the Interior.
National Archives Record Group 48 (includes
letterbooks from the Pacific Railroad Surveys) ;
Record Group 57* Geological Survey (includes
Hayden Survey, King correspondence, Wheeler papers,
reports of Powell Survey) .
U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management.
1975 Bicentennial Action and Interim Recreation
Management Plan.
U.S. Department of State.
Territorial Papers of Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico,
Utah, Washington, and Wyoming, 1851-1874.
Bancroft.
U.S. Office of the Chief of Engineers.
National Archives Record Group 77' Includes
records of the Chief of Topographical Engineers
(Pacific Railroad Reports) and part of the records
of the Bureau of Exploration and Surveys.
U.S. Office of Indian Affairs.
Correspondence and Records, Stewart, Nevada, 1870-
1962. Federal Records Center, San Francisco.
206
U.S. Office of Indian Affairs.
Letters Received OIA , Nevada Super intendency ,
1861-1880. University of Nevada, Reno.
U.S. Office of Indian Affairs.
Letters Received OIA Utah S uper intendency , 1849-
1880. University of Nevada, Reno.
U.S. Office of Indian Affairs.
Selected Correspondence and Papers from the Utah
Superintendency File, 1860-1870. Bancroft.
U.S. Office of Internal Revenue.
District of Nevada. Record of Brewers' Returns,
1880. University of Nevada, Reno.
U.S. Post Office. Berlin, Nevada.
Official Postmasters' Account and Record Book,
4th Class, for Post Office at Berlin, State of
Nevada, 1903-08. University of Nevada, Reno.
URS/John A. Blume & Associates.
1977 Survey of Historic Sites: Southern Nevada and
Death Valley. Draft Ms., San Francisco.
Vanderburg, William 0.
1936 Placer Mining in Nevada. University of Nevada
Bulletin (Bureau of Mines) 30(4).
Vanderburg, W. 0.
1939 Reconnaissance of Mining Districts in Lander
County, Nevada. U.S. Bureau of Mines Information
Circular 7043.
Venstrom, Cruz.
1940 Railroad Grant Lands of Nevada. Reno: U.S. Bureau
of Agricultural Economics.
Venstrom, Cruz and Howard Mason, comps.
1944 Agricultural History of Nevada. Ms., University
of Nevada, Reno.
Vollmer, Edward and William Vollmer.
Correspondence and Records, 1868-1877, Edward
Vollmer & Co., Belmont and Shermantown. Nevada
Historical Society.
Watkins, T. H.
1971 Gold and Silver in the West. Palo Alto: American
West Publishing Co.
207
Webb, Walter Prescott
1931 The Great Plains. New York: Grosset and Dunlap.
Weiss , Harry A .
1932 Some Observations on Desert Trails. Ms.,
Bancroft.
Welch, Patrick H.
1979 Historic Overview of the Shoshone-Eureka Resource
Area. Bureau of Land Management, Battle Mountain
District. Typescript.
Wells, Fargo & Co.
Correspondence and Papers, 1861-1883. Wells Fargo
Bank, San Francisco.
Welton, E. W.
I867 Map of the Mining Districts of Reese River . . .
Bancroft.
Wenban, Simeon.
Correspondence and Records, Cortez, Nevada,
1885-1891. University of Nevada, Reno.
Wentworth, Edward N.
19^8 America's Sheep Trails. Ames s Iowa State
University Press.
Wheeler, A. D.
Letters, Correspondence and Papers, 190^-1905.
Nevada Historical Society.
Wheelock, Harrison.
186^ Guide and Map of Reese River and Humboldt . . .
San Francisco: Towne and Bacon.
Whiff en, Marcus.
1969 American Architecture Since 1780. Cambridge:
M.I.T. Press.
Williams, H. T.
1879 The Pacific Tourist: Williams' Illustrated Trans-
Continental Guide of Travel, from the Atlantic to
the Pacific Ocean. New Yck.
Williams, Tate.
n.d. Reminiscences of a Son of Eureka Pioneers . . .
Ms., University of Nevada Oral History Project,
Reno.
Wittwer, Eldon E.
1958 Financing Agriculture in Nevada. University of
Nevada Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 200.
208
Wittwer, Eldon E.
I960 Nevada Agriculture. University of Nevada
Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 210.
Wolcott, G. E.
1909 The Mines and Mills of Tonopah, Nevada.
Engineering and Mining Journal 8?: 59^-597.
Woman's Silver League, Austin, Nevada.
Preamble and Resolutions Adopted 11 August I893.
University of Nevada, Reno.
Wooton, E. V.
1932 Public Domain of Nevada and Factors Affecting Its
Use. Bureau of Agricultural Economics, Technical
Bulletin #301.
Works Progress Administration.
1938 Inventory of the County Archives of Nevada.
Reno: Historical Records Survey Project, 1937-38.
Works Progress Administration.
Papers and Records, 1935-^0- Nevada Historical
Society.
Wren, Thomas (ed.).
190^ A History of the State of Nevada, Its Resources and
People. New York: Lewis Publishing Co.
Wyman, Walker D.
1945 The Wild Horse of the West. Caldwell, ID: Caxton
Printers .
Young, James A. and Jerry R. Budy.
1979 Historical Use of Nevada's Pinyon-Juniper
Woodlands. Journal of Forest History 23: 112-121.
209
Newspapers
Austin Sun .
Battle Mountain Messenger .
Battle Mountain Scout .
Belmont Mountain Champion .
Belmont Courier .
Eureka Sentinel .
Eureka Tri-Weekly Standard .
Manhattan Mail .
Manhattan News.
Manhattan Post .
Manhattan Times .
Nye County News (lone).
Reese River Reveille (Austin).
Round Mountain Nugget .
Tonopah Bonanza .
Tonopah Daily Bonanza .
Tonopah Daily Times .
Tonopah Daily Times and Bonanza .
Tonopah Miner .
Tonopah Mining Reporter .
Tonopah Nevadan .
Tonopah Sun .
Tybo Weekly Sun .
<TU.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE:1982-57W>70 / 280
Bureau of Land Management
Library
Bfdg. 50, Denver Federal Center
Denver, CO 80225
ler
--
u
u z
H Ptl
< D
Q H
a
as
2h
0!Z
WW
Hi
;zW
-q
w <
*3
OP
Q
a:
<
OS
oJ
>
TVNews
OpenLibrary